Lets talk about the supposed vow of chastity of Mary

[justinangel]

I think this is your most telling post, CalifornianJosiah..........

So, ultimately, you have to come to the realization that people in this thread view "proof" in a fundamentally different way than you do. You want a written document from pre-100AD or a VHS tape or something like that (while completely brushing aside any and all other forms of evidence).

.......

I think nothing more than a time machine would satisfy CJ.

PAX

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Um, no. The quote is from you, not me.

YOU are the one offered as an apologetic to this dogma that (and this is a verbatim quote from YOU), "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV."


YOU are the one saying that "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." I simply noted that the statement should be true to be regarded - so I asked for the confirmation of such. I made it as easy as possibility could be. You seem to not be interested in whether what you said is true, does this apply to what others say is true, as well?


You are the one who posted, "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." Will you substantiate it as true?


.

I already did:
St. Jerone,Athanasius, the council of Constantinople, the Protoevangellion etc.

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.\


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....






.

 

[Thekla]

Nobody answered my question several pages back on other virgins/celibates in the Bible. Did any of them actually make a vow of celibacy? Did they actually say that, using the word vow, or one similar, or was it implied or a given in these people's cases? I'm asking you, Thekla, because you know Bible history and Jewish history pretty well (as well as Philothei). Hopefully you can answer this question.

I can't think of a particular vow occurring in the Bible as an example, only that if a woman makes a vow - and makes it known to her future husband and father - they may not later overrule her right to make and keep the vow. (Numbers 30)

As for periods of chastity, there are examples in the Bible; and, these are associated with approaching the "holy". For example, when the Israelites are to accompany Moses to the Mt., they are to keep away from women for 3 days iirc. Likewise, when David asks to eat the showbread, the priest assents after making sure that David and those with him have refrained from sex for a period of time.

In Midrash it is explained that after his encounter with God, Moses remained celibate for the rest of his life. I do not recall if Midrash claims he made a vow. Josephus does recount the Theraputae (I think that's the name) who remain chaste for life.

Per vows in general (including the Nazarite vow), the directives are included in Numbers 30. It seems that according to the Mishneh Torah (collected, 12th c.) the way a vow is expressed is rather fluid. (According to a cited statement in Wikipedia, it is enough to say "me too" when a Nazarite passes. Nazirite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Thekla]

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.\


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....

In researching and thinking to develop your inquiry and counterargument here, have you read these authors ?

 

[mrmccormo]

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.\


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....

.

Otherwise.....what? You've made it clear that your own criteria for "proof" is entirely inconsistent and illogical with secular logic, with church history, and with the Bible.

#3 has already been accomplished multiple times throughout this thread many times over, not just with the teachings of St. Jerome, Athanasius, etc. but also with many other church leaders.

As far as #1 and #2 goes, you've yet to explain why "they believed it since 33AD" means "if there is a claim they believed it since 33AD, then we must produce a document from that same time period to prove it". You go round and round in circles, refusing to justify why we must do this, yet all the same insisting that YOU never made the claim or that YOU never made the criteria.

The proof is in Tradition. Holy Tradition is - by nature - passed down right from the beginning. Therefore, if you do not agree with what the Holy Tradition postulates, then it would be very helpful to show us from where the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity materialized. You would need to show us an "before and after" snapshot of Christianity.

Though the idea makes you squirm, the fact of the matter is that Holy Tradition is the best evidence we have for the majority of Christianity's teaching, not just Mary's virginity, but also the canon of Scripture, the doctrine of original sin/depravity of man, the Trinity, and much more.

If you doubt Tradition, you doubt the Christian faith. As crazy as that might sounds and as contrary as that is to your Lutheran sensibilities, it is true, not just in an "early church" sense but also in a Biblical sense.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

you couldn't care less what any church father says.

1. Quote me on that.


2. I don't deny that the RCC may interpret the snippets it choses from the authors it choses to support the views of itself. In the words of my CATHOLIC teachers, "those spreading gossip always insist they are telling the truth." It isn't NECESSARILY so.


3. I don't recall previously saying anything at all about these not-witnessing witnesses you've presented. Since no substantiation via them was offered, there was nothing for me to comment on. The FEW - very, very few - RCC and/or EO chosen "Fathers" quoted here simply are said to have said what they said. NOTHING is presented to reveal it to be true - thus there is no attempt at substantiation to discuss - by me or you or anyone, they presented NOTHING. Yes - there seem to be a handful of people who CENTURIES later express this opinion - but they share NOTHING about how this is known to be true, they offer NO substantiation whatsoever. Thus, it seems irrelevant vis-a-vis substantiation.

when I presented Martin Luther's stance and Augustine's stance on the perpetual virginity of Mary, you didn't bat an eye.

Why would you want me to?

The Augustine snippet you provided, from some 300 years after the death (or undeath) of Mary said NOTHING about why it's true or important. Yes, it seemed he believed it. I could quote you someone who believes alien abductions are true, too. NO ONE here, my friend, denies that some think it true. That's not REMOTELY related to the issue before us, is it? The issue is this: The substantiation for a specific VOW Mary is said to have made with God, the precise content thereof, and that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER. Thousands believe in alien abductions, NO ONE denies that! It's a separate issue of whether it's true - to the highest level of certainty and a matter of greatest importance to all. Let's try to say on topic, okay?


Yes, Luther believed it true. No one denies that. He never taught it as dogma or even doctrine - a point you keep forgetting to mention. Is your point that whatever Luther believes is ERGO documentation of it's status as indisputable dogma? IF so, let's talk about the RC Papacy. IF not, then how is his opinions about things substantiation of their being of the greatest certainty of Truth and highest importance to all? I've asked you that a few times, you keep evading the question.

You want a written document from pre-100AD or a VHS tape or something like that

AGAIN, you keep getting our positions reversed (on purpose, I don't know).

OTHERS - Catholics and Orthodox - have said it's true because "the majority of Christians since 33 AD have believed it to be dogma." It's not MY apologetic (you keep missing that). Where we seem to disagree is that to you, truth just doesn't seem to matter (as long as it is a member of the RC or EO denominations and helps an RC and EO dogma) whereas I think it's relevant. Since THIS is given as the apologetic and it's entirely dependent on the internal fact of it, that needs to be substantiated for it to have any relevance. I KNOW you passionately disagree with me (as long as it seems to help a RC or EO dogma), but that is my position. IF I said, "Every Catholic Cardinal in the world knows and believes that the Pope is married to a man who lives with him at the Vatican and ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that he is gay and is married to a man!" I just have a hunch you'd ask me to substantiate the internal point of the apologetic before you give it any relevance to the issue I'm trying to support as dogma. But given our discussion, I realize I may well be wrong about that, you might actually regard it as fully appropriate and entirely irrelevant is it's true or not.

However, don't be so surprised or dismissive of people who have decided to consider all of what a church father says, not just bits and pieces.

... and yet, that's what you're doing. Bits and pieces, chosen from the authors the RC chooses, from the writings the RC chooses - irrelevant if there is any substantiation or not. "IF Luther says it, it's just gotta be dogma (as long as it agrees with me, in the opinion of me)." If a noncatholic does what you are supporting as best, they get ridicule, laughter and condemnation - as any who have been around CF for awhile know. But again, you seem to have entirely missed the whole point of the discussion. NO ONE is denying that some believe this. Some believe in alien abductions, too. The issue here is entirely different than that. The issue is: is it true? What is the substantiation for this as a matter of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth - this issue of how often Mary may or may not have has sex during Her time on earth? An issue everyone - including you - admits there is ZERO indication was taught by Mary, Joseph, Jesus, any Apostle, anyone who even had the theoretical possibility of knowing Mary or any penmen of Scripture.









.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Um, no. The quote is from you, not me.

YOU are the one offered as an apologetic to this dogma that (and this is a verbatim quote from YOU), "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV."


YOU are the one saying that "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." I simply noted that the statement should be true to be regarded - so I asked for the confirmation of such. I made it as easy as possibility could be. You seem to not be interested in whether what you said is true, does this apply to what others say is true, as well?


You are the one who posted, "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." Will you substantiate it as true?


.

I already did: St. Jerone,Athanasius, the council of Constantinople, the Protoevangellion etc.

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.\


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....



.

Otherwise.....what?

It's irrelevant and to be dismissed from the discussion.





.

 

[mrmccormo]

CalifornianJosiah, you're still missing the point.

You pick and choose pieces of what a church father (whether it's Luther or Augustine or whoever) as a point of intellect. If a church father says something you don't care about, you dismiss it (which is what you did when I and others gave the quotes you asked for, yet now you change your tune and ask for pre100AD evidence).

We take the whole into account as a point of faith. We believe that the truth was faithfully handed down through Tradition. Therefore, we cite Tradition as proof. It's actually a pretty simple idea. We believe that the same Christians who arranged our Bible, who preserved the doctrine of the Trinity, who taught many, many core tenants to the Christian faith ALSO happened to faithfully preserve the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. They got it right with the Bible, so as a matter of faith, we believe that they got it right with the perpetual virginity of Mary.

It's a matter of faith. We are unwilling to accept only a portion of what the universal church - from Rome to Jerusalem - believed while rejecting doctrines that "don't make sense" or don't have a pre100AD document to validate it.

That is what you are missing, and truthfully, no one is "getting their positions reversed" in this thread.

 

[Philothei]

It's irrelevant and to be dismissed from the discussion.





.

Hi CJ good morning to you It is not irrelevant the Fathers talking about EV. I already have presented the sources. No need to re-post them. Have a beautiful day pal

 

[Philothei]

Therefore, we cite Tradition as proof. It's actually a pretty simple idea. We believe that the same Christians who arranged our Bible, who preserved the doctrine of the Trinity, who taught many, many core tenants to the Christian faith ALSO happened to faithfully preserve the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. They got it right with the Bible, so as a matter of faith, we believe that they got it right with the perpetual virginity of Mary.

This ^

And pluse if you want doc from 100 AD for the EV then why not ask a doc from 100 for all the NT? Why you relay on copies of the NT? This is inconsistancy truly.

 

[Philothei]

2. I don't deny that the RCC may interpret the snippets it choses from the authors it choses to support the views of itself. In the words of my CATHOLIC teachers, "those spreading gossip always insist they are telling the truth." It isn't NECESSARILY so.

Is it gossip the council of Constantinople... ??

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

1. Quote me on that.


2. I don't deny that the RCC may interpret the snippets it choses from the authors it choses to support the views of itself. In the words of my CATHOLIC teachers, "those spreading gossip always insist they are telling the truth." It isn't NECESSARILY so.


3. I don't recall previously saying anything at all about these not-witnessing witnesses you've presented. Since no substantiation via them was offered, there was nothing for me to comment on. The FEW - very, very few - RCC and/or EO chosen "Fathers" quoted here simply are said to have said what they said. NOTHING is presented to reveal it to be true - thus there is no attempt at substantiation to discuss - by me or you or anyone, they presented NOTHING. Yes - there seem to be a handful of people who CENTURIES later express this opinion - but they share NOTHING about how this is known to be true, they offer NO substantiation whatsoever. Thus, it seems irrelevant vis-a-vis substantiation.






Why would you want me to?

The Augustine snippet you provided, from some 300 years after the death (or undeath) of Mary said NOTHING about why it's true or important. Yes, it seemed he believed it. I could quote you someone who believes alien abductions are true, too. NO ONE here, my friend, denies that some think it true. That's not REMOTELY related to the issue before us, is it? The issue is this: The substantiation for a specific VOW Mary is said to have made with God, the precise content thereof, and that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER. Thousands believe in alien abductions, NO ONE denies that! It's a separate issue of whether it's true - to the highest level of certainty and a matter of greatest importance to all. Let's try to say on topic, okay?


Yes, Luther believed it true. No one denies that. He never taught it as dogma or even doctrine - a point you keep forgetting to mention. Is your point that whatever Luther believes is ERGO documentation of it's status as indisputable dogma? IF so, let's talk about the RC Papacy. IF not, then how is his opinions about things substantiation of their being of the greatest certainty of Truth and highest importance to all? I've asked you that a few times, you keep evading the question.







AGAIN, you keep getting our positions reversed (on purpose, I don't know).

OTHERS - Catholics and Orthodox - have said it's true because "the majority of Christians since 33 AD have believed it to be dogma." It's not MY apologetic (you keep missing that). Where we seem to disagree is that to you, truth just doesn't seem to matter (as long as it is a member of the RC or EO denominations and helps an RC and EO dogma) whereas I think it's relevant. Since THIS is given as the apologetic and it's entirely dependent on the internal fact of it, that needs to be substantiated for it to have any relevance. I KNOW you passionately disagree with me (as long as it seems to help a RC or EO dogma), but that is my position. IF I said, "Every Catholic Cardinal in the world knows and believes that the Pope is married to a man who lives with him at the Vatican and ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that he is gay and is married to a man!" I just have a hunch you'd ask me to substantiate the internal point of the apologetic before you give it any relevance to the issue I'm trying to support as dogma. But given our discussion, I realize I may well be wrong about that, you might actually regard it as fully appropriate and entirely irrelevant is it's true or not.

​

... and yet, that's what you're doing. Bits and pieces, chosen from the authors the RC chooses, from the writings the RC chooses - irrelevant if there is any substantiation or not. "IF Luther says it, it's just gotta be dogma (as long as it agrees with me, in the opinion of me)." If a noncatholic does what you are supporting as best, they get ridicule, laughter and condemnation - as any who have been around CF for awhile know. But again, you seem to have entirely missed the whole point of the discussion. NO ONE is denying that some believe this. Some believe in alien abductions, too. The issue here is entirely different than that. The issue is: is it true? What is the substantiation for this as a matter of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth - this issue of how often Mary may or may not have has sex during Her time on earth? An issue everyone - including you - admits there is ZERO indication was taught by Mary, Joseph, Jesus, any Apostle, anyone who even had the theoretical possibility of knowing Mary or any penmen of Scripture.


.

CalifornianJosiah, you're still missing the point.

With all due respect, I think you are. You are TRYING to suggest that IF the RC or EO denomination can find a remarkably FEW people from CENTURIES later who say they believe something, ERGO it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth. Got it. But that's not the issue here. NO ONE - my friend, NO ONE - is denying that some beleive it to be true. That's not remotely the issue, is it? the issue is: is it true? Is it a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary made a specific vow to God, that the RC and EO denominations know the precise content of said vow, and that Mary Had No Sex EVER? It's about truth and substantiation, NOT whether there are people who believe in Bigfoot (there are - no one disputes that).
And who is picking choosing? Well, you quote Luther on this "and ergo, it's a dogmatic fact cuz LUTHER beleived it!!" Okay, then why don't you quote him on the Pope? Aren't you "pickin' and choosing?" And why not note that as far as you know, Mary said NOTHING! Joseph said NOTHING (they only two who POSSIBILY could know this tidbit of bedroom info). Jesus said NOTHING. The Apostles all said NOTHING. No one who possibility could have even theoretically could have known Mary said NOTHING - at least as far as ANY can document, you don't bring all the profound SILENCE into the discussion, that's irrelevant. who is picking and choosing?


What is entered into the discussion as foundational points to the apolgetic IS relevant to ME because I think truth matters. I realize, you passionately disagree. One can say, "All believed this in 33 ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest certainty of truth and greatest importance to all!" and it is entirely irrelevant to you if it's true that all believed it in 33. As long as it's a member of the RC or EO denomination being given a total "pass" on truth and it supports an RC or EO teaching. But if I said, "Every Cardinal in the world knows and believes that the Pope is gay - ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of truth!" you are likely to say, "Show that every Cardinal in the world believes that!" Well, actually, I'm coming to the conclusion I'm wrong about that, maybe you'd say, "Absoutely! It's just gotta be dogma!"




.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

Um, no. The quote is from you, not me.


YOU are the one offered as an apologetic to this dogma that (and this is a verbatim quote from YOU), "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV."


YOU are the one saying that "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." I simply noted that the statement should be true to be regarded - so I asked for the confirmation of such. I made it as easy as possibility could be. You seem to not be interested in whether what you said is true, does this apply to what others say is true, as well?


You are the one who posted, "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." Will you substantiate it as true?



.

I already did:

St. Jerone,Athanasius, the council of Constantinople, the Protoevangellion etc.
​

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.\


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....



.

Is it gossip the council of Constantinople... ??

Read the exchange.


You didn't reply to what I posted.






.

 

[mrmccormo]

NO ONE - is denying that some beleive it to be true. That's not remotely the issue, is it? the issue is: is it true?

Though you reject our rationale for believing as such, we believe that because they believed it, it is true. Again, it is a very simple concept, even though fundamentally you do not agree with the method we're using to come to the truth. Just as we believe the Church faithfully preserved the Bible, the truth of the Trinity, etc., we also obseve the Church clung to this doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity.

For you, the evidence that "some believed it to be true" is not enough to answer the question "is it true?". For us, it is. Of course, it is not a simple as us saying "well, the Pope said its true, therefore its true". Obviously, as it has been demonstrated, we have looked to many different sources and many different types of evidence to support our belief, so it is not a simple matter of saying "Gee, Augustine said it, so it's true". It's a matter of saying Augustine and these dozens of other church leaders, and church history, and church doctrine, and the ecumenical councils said it's true.

And who is picking choosing? Well, you quote Luther on this "and ergo, it's a dogmatic fact cuz LUTHER beleived it!!"

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that even Luther believed it, yet again building the case for its validity. Because you continue to change your criteria for what confirms something as a "dogmatic fact", we've been doing our best to weave through your dodges and changes to deliver the facts you've been asking for.

So, Luther's statements are an evidence submitted to court, Exhibit G.

Okay, then why don't you quote him on the Pope? Aren't you "pickin' and choosing?"

Luther's stance on the Pope is not relevant to this discussion, is it? Perhaps in order for this discussion to be fair, I should post word-for-word the completed works of every single church father I quoted. Is that what you're advocating for?

"Picking and choosing" means "picking someone's stance while ignoring one of their other stances". If you think that Luther's quotes on the Pope are relevant to the perpetual virginity of Mary, please explain. If I dismiss your quotes, then yes indeed, I am "picking and choosing". But let's first determine what relevancy it has to the discussion at hand. After all, you are the one who has been so passionate about making sure we "stay on topic".

And why not note that as far as you know, Mary said NOTHING! Joseph said NOTHING (they only two who POSSIBILY could know this tidbit of bedroom info). Jesus said NOTHING. The Apostles all said NOTHING. No one who possibility could have even theoretically could have known Mary said NOTHING - at least as far as ANY can document, you don't bring all the profound SILENCE into the discussion, that's irrelevant. who is picking and choosing?

You show your ignorance to the society and history of the day. You make the following assumption:

Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the Apostles, etc did not explicitly state their stance on this issue IN A WRITTEN DOCUMENT.

Therefore, because it was not explicitly stated IN A WRITTEN DOCUMENT, they were silent on the matter.

What you do not understand is that truth was transmitted orally far more frequently than truth was transmitted in writing. You take the position that since the issue of Mary's perpetual virginity was not transmitted in writing, it was not transmitted at all. You are making a baseless assumption. The doctrine of Mary's tradition was transmitted through Tradition (oral tradition).

It is one thing to say "there is no written documentation on this topic from that time period". It would be correct to say that. It is another thing entirely to say "these people were silent on the matter", as if a lack of documentation means that they were silent on the matter. That is quite a leap, and I would like you to justify why you make such a big leap.

What is entered into the discussion as foundational points to the apolgetic IS relevant to ME because I think truth matters. I realize, you passionately disagree. One can say, "All believed this in 33 ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest certainty of truth and greatest importance to all!" and it is entirely irrelevant to you if it's true that all believed it in 33. As long as it's a member of the RC or EO denomination being given a total "pass" on truth and it supports an RC or EO teaching. But if I said, "Every Cardinal in the world knows and believes that the Pope is gay - ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of truth!" you are likely to say, "Show that every Cardinal in the world believes that!" Well, actually, I'm coming to the conclusion I'm wrong about that, maybe you'd say, "Absoutely! It's just gotta be dogma!"

You seem more upset, then, at the idea that the consensus of the Chuch can accurately transmit truth. Or rather, you buck the idea that the consensus of the Church is admissible as "evidence" to the truth of its claims. This issue seems less about Mary and more about your perceptions of how "truth" (whatever your definition of that word might be) was transmitted from Jesus to the Apostles to the Church and now to us. I can assure you that the transmission of truth was not done primarily in writing for the first 300 years of the Christian faith.

I believe that the history and Tradition of the Church is proof positive that Mary remained a virgin. Yes, because "they said so", I also believe it, not on account of their awesomeness or Pope-ness, or Orthodox-ness, but on account of the same Holy Spirit in me also working in them. It is a statement of faith.

If believing in Mary's perpetual virginity "because they said so" is not sufficient for you, I understand. I ask that you apply Romans 14 to us if you think that we are weaker in the faith, but I also ask that you show us a better way of "proving" our dogmatic belief.

 

[Philothei]

.






Read the exchange.


You didn't reply to what I posted.






.

I think you confuse me for RC I am not RC we rely on councils NOT the Pope

 

[Philothei]

But if I said, "Every Cardinal in the world knows and believes that the Pope is gay - ergo it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty of truth!" you are likely to say, "Show that every Cardinal in the world believes that!" Well, actually, I'm coming to the conclusion I'm wrong about that, maybe you'd say, "Absoutely! It's just gotta be dogma!"

nah... if that was not accepted by the whole church... and through a council. That is not the case here.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Um, no. The quote is from you, not me.


YOU are the one offered as an apologetic to this dogma that (and this is a verbatim quote from YOU), "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV."


YOU are the one saying that "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." I simply noted that the statement should be true to be regarded - so I asked for the confirmation of such. I made it as easy as possibility could be. You seem to not be interested in whether what you said is true, does this apply to what others say is true, as well?


You are the one who posted, "The majority of the people who are christian in this earth since 33 AD believed in the EV." Will you substantiate it as true?

I already did: St. Jerone,Athanasius, the council of Constantinople, the Protoevangellion etc.

Then....


1. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion so declared such in 33 AD.


2. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion are all people.


3. Document that St. Jerone (who is that?), Athanasius, the Council of Constantinople and the Protoevangelilion all stated that Mary had no sex ever.


Otherwise.....

Is it gossip the council of Constantinople... ??

​

Read the exchange.


You didn't reply to what I posted.

I think you confuse me for RC I am not RC we rely on councils NOT the Pope

Sorry, I have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER how your "reply" has any relation whatsoever to our discussion. Please read the exchange.






.

 

[justinangel]

Is it gossip the council of Constantinople... ??

The Ecumenical Councils were convoked to stop the spread of gossip.

"And those who say "there once was when he was not", and "before he was begotten he was not", and he came to be from things that were not, or from another hypostasis, affirming that the Son of God was subject to change or alteration these the catholic and apostolic church anathematizes."
Council of Nicea l (A.D. 325)

"The profession of faith of the holy fathers who gathered in Nicea in Bythnia is not to be abrogated, but it is to remain in force. Every heresy is to be anathematized and in particular that of the Eunomians or Anomoeans, that of the Arians and Eudoxians, that of the Semi-Arians or Pneumatomachi, that of the Sabellians, that of the Marcellians, that of the Photinians, and that of the Apollinarians."
Council of Constantinople 1, Canon 1 (A.D. 381)

"If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh), let him be anathema."
Council of Ephesus, Anathema 1/12 (A.D. 431)

"There are those who are trying to ruin the proclamation of the truth, and through their private heresies they have spawned novel formulas: some by daring to corrupt the mystery of the Lord's economy on our behalf, and refusing to apply the word "God-bearer" to the Virgin; and others by introducing a confusion and mixture, and mindlessly imagining there is a single nature of the flesh and the divinity, and fantastically supposing that in the confusion of the divine nature of the Only-Begotten is passible."
Council of Chalcedon, Definition of Faith (A.D. 451)

"If anyone declares that the Word of God who works miracles is not identical with the Christ who suffered, or alleges that God the Word was with the Christ who was born of woman, or was in him in a way that one might be in another, but that our Lord Jesus Christ was one and the same, the Word of God incarnate and made man, and that the miracles and the sufferings which he voluntarily underwent in the flesh were not of the same person, let him be anathema."
Council of Constantinople ll, Anathema 3/14 (A.D. 553)

"And we proclaim equally two natural volitions or wills in him and two natural principles of action which undergo no division, no change, no partition, no confusion, in according to the teachings of the holy fathers. And the two natural wills not in opposition, as the impious heretics say, far from it, but his human will following, and not resisting or struggling, rather in fact subject to his divine and powerful will."
Council of Constantinople lll, Exposition of Faith (A.D. 680-681)

PAX

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

For you, the evidence that "some believed it to be true" is not enough to answer the question "is it true?". For us, it is.

1. No, it is not. My CATHOLIC teachers taught us that those who teach things usually claim they are true - but that such does not make it true. Luther (and millions of others) taught that the Papacy is the anti-Christ and yes, he said it was true, ergo is it a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that the Papacy IS the anti-Christ? You seem to both condemn AND embraced to the greatest degree possible the exact same rubric. Is it right or is it wrong?


2. As I've noted a few times, you seem to be discussing an issue NO ONE is debating and is NOT the topic of this thread (and may be disallowed). NO ONE has denied or questioned that some BELIEVE this. Some believe in bigfoot too. Some believe the Pope is the Anti-Christ. Some believe in "Once Saved, Always Saved." Some believe in Transubstantiation, some that alien bodies are being kept at Area 51. Some believed the world is flat. NO ONE DENIES that. And NO ONE asked about that. The issue here is: is it true? What is the confirming substantiation to the level claimed for this position that Mary made a specific VOW to God, the precise CONTENT of said vow, and that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER. Of course some believe it. It seems some have since the 4th century. The question is NOT "did they believe it?" The question is: IS IT TRUE - as a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that even Luther believed it

It's part of your "picking and choosing." You have NOTHING from Scripture, from Mary, from Joseph, from Jesus, from any penmen of Scripture, from anyone who lived in the First (and likely Second or Third) Centuries, you have NOTHING from anyone who even COULD have known Mary or Joseph - so you search and search and search until you can find some snippet from CENTURIES later that offers NO SUBSTANTIATION at all - just that seems to indicate this person seems to believe it. "Ah!!! Gotta be dogma!" You even quote Luther - even though your denomination regards him as a heretic and apostate! "Ah, Luther believed it - that's confirmation that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER!" (But you don't want me to quote him on the Papacy..... interesting!).

You make the following assumption:

Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the Apostles, etc did not explicitly state their stance on this issue IN A WRITTEN DOCUMENT.

Therefore, because it was not explicitly stated IN A WRITTEN DOCUMENT, they were silent on the matter.

What you do not understand is that truth was transmitted orally far more frequently than truth was transmitted in writing. You take the position that since the issue of Mary's perpetual virginity was not transmitted in writing, it was not transmitted at all. You are making a baseless assumption. The doctrine of Mary's tradition was transmitted through Tradition (oral tradition).

It is one thing to say "there is no written documentation on this topic from that time period". It would be correct to say that. It is another thing entirely to say "these people were silent on the matter", as if a lack of documentation means that they were silent on the matter. That is quite a leap, and I would like you to justify why you make such a big leap.

Yes, you have no confirmation. I agree. In fact, in YOUR summery of your "evidence" some while back in this thread, you actually give LESS support for this view than many (maybe even me) would give - kind of surprising, and you gave GREAT credence - more than any would expect of you - for those who are silent. Oh, well. You don't want to discuss what you gave - or my response, I know that.



No, I've not made ANY assumptions. Your apologetic is entirely and completely and totally based, built and developed on assumptions (ones you reject if any other does as you do), for example, if one has an opinion it is ergo dogmatic confirmation of Truth of the greatest certainty.

I also ask that you show us a better way of "proving" our dogmatic belief.

Again, you seem to have our positions reversed. YOU are the one insisting - in the most powerful way possible - that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty of Truth that Mary Had No Sex EVER. If all you have for this are apologetics you reject as invalid, then so be it - but that's YOUR position. I've never said She had sex. Once, twice or at all. I never said She didn't. I never said it's a matter of highest importance to all the world if this is zero times, one time, two times or more - YOU did (you just refuse to say why). I never said it's a matter of greatest certainty of Truth - YOU did (then went out of your way to reveal how surprisingly weak it is - you actually seem to think it's weaker than I do). YOU are saying it's a dogmatic fact of highest importance to all and greatest certainty NOT me. The only point that needs proving is YOURS - but, as we've seen....







.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

"And those who say "there once was when he was not", and "before he was begotten he was not", and he came to be from things that were not, or from another hypostasis, affirming that the Son of God was subject to change or alteration these the catholic and apostolic church anathematizes."
Council of Nicea l (A.D. 325)

"The profession of faith of the holy fathers who gathered in Nicea in Bythnia is not to be abrogated, but it is to remain in force. Every heresy is to be anathematized and in particular that of the Eunomians or Anomoeans, that of the Arians and Eudoxians, that of the Semi-Arians or Pneumatomachi, that of the Sabellians, that of the Marcellians, that of the Photinians, and that of the Apollinarians."
Council of Constantinople 1, Canon 1 (A.D. 381)

"If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh), let him be anathema."
Council of Ephesus, Anathema 1/12 (A.D. 431)

"There are those who are trying to ruin the proclamation of the truth, and through their private heresies they have spawned novel formulas: some by daring to corrupt the mystery of the Lord's economy on our behalf, and refusing to apply the word "God-bearer" to the Virgin; and others by introducing a confusion and mixture, and mindlessly imagining there is a single nature of the flesh and the divinity, and fantastically supposing that in the confusion of the divine nature of the Only-Begotten is passible."
Council of Chalcedon, Definition of Faith (A.D. 451)

"If anyone declares that the Word of God who works miracles is not identical with the Christ who suffered, or alleges that God the Word was with the Christ who was born of woman, or was in him in a way that one might be in another, but that our Lord Jesus Christ was one and the same, the Word of God incarnate and made man, and that the miracles and the sufferings which he voluntarily underwent in the flesh were not of the same person, let him be anathema."
Council of Constantinople ll, Anathema 3/14 (A.D. 553)

"And we proclaim equally two natural volitions or wills in him and two natural principles of action which undergo no division, no change, no partition, no confusion, in according to the teachings of the holy fathers. And the two natural wills not in opposition, as the impious heretics say, far from it, but his human will following, and not resisting or struggling, rather in fact subject to his divine and powerful will."
Council of Constantinople lll, Exposition of Faith (A.D. 680-681)

PAX

Not a single affirmation (much less substantiation) for the specific VOW of Mary, the precise CONTENT thereof, or that it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance and greatest certainty that Mary Had No Sex EVER. None of these say ANYTHING about how often She did or did not have sex up to and including the moment of Her death (or was it undeath?). Nothing about Mary being a PERPETUAL anything at all, much less substantiation for it.



Nor do I see these confirming the apologetic that "the majority of believers since 33 AD believed this ergo it is a dogmatic fact!" Or "all those that lived during the time of the Apostles believed this, ergo it is a dogmatic fact." Or "the Apostles all taught it ergo it is a dogmatic fact."






.