Is this statement about Mary blasphemous?

[laconicstudent]

YouTube - Dormition Stichera

​

 

[addo]

I wonder if Christ would think it is not disrespectful to refer to His mother as being just a vessel.

Would He...? After all, He inspired Peter, the one who is considered the first pope by some, to say: Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel ... (1 Peter 3:7) First of all, Jesus calls the wife the weaker vessel. Mary was a wife, wife of Joseph. Mary was a woman. So she was a vessel, and according to the Bible, the weaker vessel, in comparison with the stronger vessel, which is the husband, which would be Joseph in Mary's case. So I can't see how calling Mary a "vessel" is disrespectful since He called all women weaker vessels. Which would be worse, if I'm not mistaken.

So Our Lady is a window now?

You would seriously knock on your Minister's door, and if his mother answers it, say to her, 'I don't want the window; I want the door.'

Supposing the mother couldn't actually help you in any way with your problems, I would say that, in other words of course.

This is what you are saying of the Theotokos.

Lord, have mercy on us all!

And we also call Jesus the way and the gate. Why is it that it is wrong to give object names to Mary as well? Besides, it's an allegory. Don't take it too literally...

 

[addo]

If that's all RC's were doing, this forum wouldn't exist. There's a difference between "respecting" Mary, and elevating her to the status of "Queen of Heaven".


Who's "ignoring" Mary?

Your posts (actions) in this forum show otherwise. My guess is that you hate the Catholic Church

It depends on your definition of "hate". So how do you define hate?

and their practices about Mary,

That's something I'm certain he does.

but if one didn't see this, one could see that you actually have a very strong dislike for Mary.

Or what you have done out of Mary.

Think about what you post. Christ is watching and listening,

I agree with that.

as well as His Mother.

His mother is dead waiting for the resurrection just like Paul, Peter, John and whatever dead Christians is there is.

You disrespect or dishonor her, you dishonor Him.

How did we disrespect Mary? Did we ever insult her? I my opinion shinbits is wrong: Mary is Queen of Heaven. To say it more correctly: she will be Queen of Heaven. As you have said, the mother of the king is Queen. But Jesus said: For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my mother. (Mark 3:35) Thus all those that do the will of God are Queen. I suppose she did the will of God and she is Queen of Heaven, but so is every Christian.

Twaddle. The mother of a King is a Queen. Christ is King of Kings, and his mother derives her title from his, the same as Bathsheba does.

True. But we are His mother along with Mary: For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my mother. (Mark 3:35) Thus we also bear the title of "Queen of Heaven".

From reading Kings, we can see that even Christ himself will bow to his mother in respect.

Afaik, He will bow down before God. He won't bow down before anyone else, but as it is written: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth. (Philippians 2:9-10) All will bow down before Jesus, and Jesus Himself will bow down only to one other living being: God.

Not because she is God, but because she is his mother and he obeys the ten commandments.

So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king's mother; and she sat on his right." (1Kings 2:19)

I don't understand what does obeying the Ten Commandments have to do with this.

A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head.
Revelation 12v1

This woman cannot be Mary, according to the Roman Catholic Church. If she would, the fact would be in contradiction with the roman Catholic Church's teachings. It is written in the next verse: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. (Revelation 12:2) Thus she suffered the sufferings of giving birth. Let's get back to Genesis: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (Genesis 3:16). Since this woman suffered when she was close to bring forth the child, she sinned, for this suffering is a penalty for sin, specially made for woman.

This woman represents the Church, not Mary. Or is it that Mary is a sinner? That wouldn't be acceptable to the Roman Catholic mind.

Why on earth anyone would want to seek reasons to disrespect one of the very first Christian believers, and one of our most faithful saints, let alone the mother of Christ himself, is totally beyond me.

You first have to explain how on earth did we "disrespect" MAry.

...in order to prepare for the birth of Mary

You know ... this sounds strange.

 

[boswd]

ad hominems, eh? still doesn't help your theologically flawed position

but the thing is you know I'm right. come Dec 26th Mary become's
M*** not to spoke of agian unitl next Christmas unless of course you are using her as a weapon. You are not to refer to her as Blessed.

Take a little test, see how many times your Pastor talks about Mary in a positive way throughout the year. or if she is even mentioned as Blessed.

it's sad really

 

[Dorothea]

Or what you have done out of Mary.

We've done nothing but given her the honor and respect she deserves as she is most blessed among women and ever shall be. If showing her respect by remembering her life events throughout the year is "doing" something to her, I'm sorry you feel that way.

His mother is dead waiting for the resurrection just like Paul, Peter, John and whatever dead Christians is there is.

Then you do not believe that Christ Resurrected on the third day and defeated death?

How did we disrespect Mary? Did we ever insult her?

People on these forums disrespect her when they say these things:

1. Mary is dead.
2. Mary is not the mother of Christ God.
3. Mary is just another human woman on Earth and God would've picked somebody else out of the pool of humans to bore His Son.
4. Mary went on about her life after giving birth to Christ by having babies with Joseph (who was decades her senior and just her protector).


Probably others I can't recall at this moment. And in saying these hurtful things, one is disrespecting God, Who chose Her and loved and honored her.

 

[shinbits]

but the thing is you know I'm right. come Dec 26th Mary become's
M*** not to spoke of agian unitl next Christmas unless of course you are using her as a weapon. You are not to refer to her as Blessed.

Take a little test, see how many times your Pastor talks about Mary in a positive way throughout the year. or if she is even mentioned as Blessed.

it's sad really

The Bible barely talks about Mary, so how many times a year should any church mention her? The Bible talks about David and Abraham countless times. Mary has just a few mentions.

The fact that RC's make her such a HUGE part of their doctrine, despite the few times the Bible refers to her, is more evidence that their priorities are wrong, concerning their faith.

It doesn't matter. This is all just an ad hominem, a logical fallacy used to distratct from the fact that someone can't defend their flawed position.

 

[shinbits]

We've done nothing but given her the honor and respect she deserves as she is most blessed among women and ever shall be.

That's a terrible misquote. The angel says "blessed are you among women"; not "above" women, and not blessed "more" than other women.

If showing her respect by remembering her life events throughout the year is "doing" something to her, I'm sorry you feel that way.

If showing her respect was all you were doing, the Mariology forum wouldn't exist. The "respect" you claim to show has crossed over into idolotry.

People on these forums disrespect her when they say these things:

1. Mary is dead.
2. Mary is not the mother of Christ God.
3. Mary is just another human woman on Earth and God would've picked somebody else out of the pool of humans to bore His Son.
4. Mary went on about her life after giving birth to Christ by having babies with Joseph (who was decades her senior and just her protector).

1) Why is it "disrespectful" to say so? Because she was used to birth Christ? Is that why?

2) And if it's true, it's not disrespectful.

3) And you have no Biblical evidence that Joseph was "decades" her senior.

4) And he wasn't "just her protector", the Bible CLEARLY states that he was her husband.

 

[shinbits]

If Mary was only a vessel, then Christ was not truly human. No mother is merely a vessel--she donates genetic materials to her offspring. If Mary didn't do that, then the Incarnation didn't save us. In order to save us, Christ had to be both fully human and fully divine.

No mother was created by her son. Mary was created by Christ, who is God. Thus, Mary was merely a vessel.

I wonder if Christ would think it is not disrespectful to refer to His mother as being just a vessel. She is His mother after all (as Christ is still fully human and divine and Mary is still very much His mother). Is she God, no she is not. However, I doubt that Christ likes someone referring to His mother as being "just a vessel".

I'm pretty sure that Christ wouldn't think it's disrespectful to refer to Mary as a vessel. After all, Jesus never refered to even once as "mother". He called her "woman", something very disrespectful to call someone who truly is your mother.

 

[shinbits]

Yes, the book of Revelation is full of symbols. I don't understand your believing Mary is just a symbol. Was she not a human being who walked on the Earth for a time?

The woman in Rev is a symbol, not an actual woman, so therefore, it's not Mary being refered to in Rev.

I'm wondering, where did you learn the beliefs you have? They seem quite foreign and unorthodox. To not believe that Mary was the mother of Christ sounds unChristian to me as well. St. Elizabeth says to Mary she's the Mother of the Lord.

Mary gave birth to Christ much like a surrogate mom can give birth to fetus implanted in her, that didn't really come from her. In this case, the surrogate isn't really the child's mom even she birthed the child. Likewis with Mary, who wasn't really Christ's mom, but had Christ put in her by the Holy Spirit, and then gave birth to him.

 

[laconicstudent]

The woman in Rev is a symbol, not an actual woman, so therefore, it's not Mary being refered to in Rev.

It is, now is it?

Mary gave birth to Christ much like a surrogate mom can give birth to fetus implanted in her, that didn't really come from her. In this case, the surrogate isn't really the child's mom even she birthed the child. Likewis with Mary, who wasn't really Christ's mom, but had Christ put in her by the Holy Spirit, and then gave birth to him.

No, that is not orthodox Christianity. Mary is really God's mother.



"And since the holy Virgin brought forth corporally God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh.


For “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God, and the Word was with God,” and he is the Maker of the ages, coeternal with the Father, and Creator of all; but, as we have already said, since he united to himself hypostatically human nature from her womb, also he subjected himself to birth as man, not as needing necessarily in his own nature birth in time and in these last times of the world, but in order that he might bless the beginning of our existence, and that that which sent the earthly bodies of our whole race to death, might lose its power for the future by his being born of a woman in the flesh. And this: “In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children,” being removed through him, he showed the truth of that spoken by the prophet, “Strong death swallowed them up, and again God hath wiped away every tear from off all faces.”243 There is a most curious blunder in the editing of this Epistle in Migne, where this passage, which is but one text, viz.: Isaiah xxv. 8 is made into two, the first few words being assigned in the margin to Hosea xiii. 14. As a matter of fact the whole sentence is turned into nonsense by making the words καὶ πάλιν as a connective supplied by St. Cyril. What the text really says is that Death prevailed indeed, but God wiped away again the tears death had caused. The same error is found in the letter as it occurs in Labbe and Cossart, and it should be remarked that it is both in the Greek and Latin. I rather suspect that St. Cyril had a purer text of the LXX. than ours which read—“And he hath swallowed death up and hath wiped away, etc.,” as the Vulgate and A.V. read. This is the reading the context certainly seems to call for. For this cause also we say that he attended, having been called, and also blessed, the marriage in Cana of Galilee, with his holy Apostles in accordance with the economy. We have been taught to hold these things by the holy Apostles and Evangelists, and all the God-inspired Scriptures, and in the true confessions of the blessed Fathers.
To all these your reverence also should agree, and give heed, without any guile. And what it is necessary your reverence should anathematize we have subjoined to our epistle."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.x.viii.html

 

[boswd]

The woman in Rev is a symbol, not an actual woman, so therefore, it's not Mary being refered to in Rev.


Mary gave birth to Christ much like a surrogate mom can give birth to fetus implanted in her, that didn't really come from her. In this case, the surrogate isn't really the child's mom even she birthed the child. Likewis with Mary, who wasn't really Christ's mom, but had Christ put in her by the Holy Spirit, and then gave birth to him.

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is not Orthodox Christianity. HOLY COW.

May I ask what Church do you belong too?

 

[boswd]

The Bible barely talks about Mary, so how many times a year should any church mention her? The Bible talks about David and Abraham countless times. Mary has just a few mentions.

The fact that RC's make her such a HUGE part of their doctrine, despite the few times the Bible refers to her, is more evidence that their priorities are wrong, concerning their faith.

It doesn't matter. This is all just an ad hominem, a logical fallacy used to distratct from the fact that someone can't defend their flawed position.

and you do realize that not just Catholics who venerate Mary don't you? Anglican's, Eastern Orthodox and even Martin Luther Venerated her.

But I'm sure you only limit your biased research to just the Catholic Church.

Very bizarre.

 

[laconicstudent]

Actually, everyone (except for certain heretics) venerated Mary as the ever-virgin Mother of God until relatively recently.

 

[katherine2001]

The woman in Rev is a symbol, not an actual woman, so therefore, it's not Mary being refered to in Rev.


Mary gave birth to Christ much like a surrogate mom can give birth to fetus implanted in her, that didn't really come from her. In this case, the surrogate isn't really the child's mom even she birthed the child. Likewis with Mary, who wasn't really Christ's mom, but had Christ put in her by the Holy Spirit, and then gave birth to him.

So you are saying that Christ was not really human. If Christ wasn't truly human, what are you basing your salvation on? If Christ was not truly human, then His sinless life, everything He did during His time walking this earth, His crucifixion, and His resurrection accomplished nothing. If Christ was not fully divine and fully human at the same time, we are not saved.

 

[boswd]

Shinbits last two post show just how far these Non Denominationals Evangelicals have really twisted God Message with Christ.

That's just whacky theology

 

[laconicstudent]

So you are saying that Christ was not really human. If Christ wasn't truly human, what are you basing your salvation on? If Christ was not truly human, then His sinless life, everything He did during His time walking this earth, His crucifixion, and His resurrection accomplished nothing. If Christ was not fully divine and fully human at the same time, we are not saved.

And,

"The unassumed is unhealed." --St. Gregory the Theologian

"The whole man would not have been saved, unless He had taken upon himself the whole man." --Origen

 

[boswd]

Quite evidently, this statement elevates Mary to a godlike status.

See Cathieranne's post #7, on the front page, it's one of the best explanations of that term that truly puts it in it's proper context and meaning.

 

[shinbits]

So you are saying that Christ was not really human. If Christ wasn't truly human, what are you basing your salvation on? If Christ was not truly human, then His sinless life, everything He did during His time walking this earth, His crucifixion, and His resurrection accomplished nothing. If Christ was not fully divine and fully human at the same time, we are not saved.

Putting words in my mouth is just another tactic as bad as the ad-hominems that have been thrown at me.

Christ was human. It's just that his existence on earth wasn't dependant on Mary, the way our existence on earth is dependant on our mothers. If my father concieved with any woman but my mother, I wouldn't be here, someone else would be here. No so with Christ; he would still have come to earth and died for our sins, if another woman was chosen besides Mary.

The reason, is simple: Mary isn't really God's mother. Just a surrogate.

 

[shinbits]

Shinbits last two post show just how far these Non Denominationals Evangelicals have really twisted God Message with Christ.

That's just whacky theology

Just saying it's "whacky" doesn't make it so. Show why.

Of course, you (and everyone else who thinks Mary was sinless) have been unable to back up any of your points, resorting ad-hominems and thread-derailment, so I doubt you'll be able to back up your claims that what I say is wrong.

 

[shinbits]

Quite evidently, this statement [in the OP] elevates Mary to a godlike status.

Exactly.