Mariology

[Benedicta00]

I listen and further challenge you to defend your stance, if this is something in which you struggle, you should consider your stance.
I ask that you do the same for me as I am ready at any point to defend my faith.

Simon, here you go, right here. A good example of what I am saying.

Can't defend our stance? What in blazers are you talking about? How can we defend against false premises and strawman?

We do not worship Mary, so I in no way can defend this stance that we do. All I can do is explain our beliefs, past that I can do no more.

Has it ever occurred to you that we are not interested in debating you about our beliefs or your own?

You believe what you do, and that's great and all we ask is that you don't misrepresent our beliefs.

Now if someone who is sincerely trying to understand Catholic theology comes along with a open heart, not a closed mind already convinced we're wrong, then I will be more than happy to explain the faith to them.

I'm just not looking to be told how wrong I am. If you take this as I'm not secure in my faith or that i couldn't debate it, then you are disillusioned. The last thing I am is unsure of my beliefs.

I've never once called you a Mary worshipper...

Yes...you have. You said we teach that Mary is is a deity.

That is not only ludicrous, it's slanderous.

If you look into my past posts (I don't block them like you do)

you'll find a thread where I asked Catholics to question whether or not I understood Catholicism... out of about 70-80 questions I was stumped once, I am probably better read on catholicism than most average Catholic

I respectfully disagree based on a sampling of you posts.

Wrong? nope, I've a 2 point goal! 1.) Have them consider their position 2.) Get any protestants considering conversion to rethink it.

Consider what position? That we shouldn't be worshipping Mary? I completely agree.

And if you wish to be a stumbling block to ppl converting to Christ one true Church, then that's between you and the Lord. I won't go there.

My arguement is never with you. It's for the lurking readers whose opinions may be in limbo.

And neither is mine with you but for the same lurkers as well.

 

[Benedicta00]

It doesn't bother me but that note was given to my then 12 year old son. How was he to decifer what was really meant?
It sounds like a rabbits foot.
The note....
The Medal of the Immaculate Conception — popularly known as the Miraculous Medal — was designed by the Blessed Virgin herself! No wonder, then that it wins such extraordinary graces .

This isn't what the OP is about only why I started studying Catholicism.

Well, let see.. if he had Catholics parents who knew the faith, he probably would have already known... if not, they would have explained it to him or they could have gone to the priest and have the priest explain it to both him and them.

Simon, if you are closed off to Catholicism then no explanation will ever suffice for you, this is why I do not debate, just defend. You will just go on thinking what ever it is that you do and believing what ever you wish, that we are dead wrong, or what ever.

But the Catholic Church is going to go on teaching her faith to those who come to her ad enrolling you kid in a Catholics school does give them the right to hand out a devotional medal.

My kids all went to a Catholic school and they knew at age 12 what a medal is.

 

[Benedicta00]

Hi Bene,

I agree completely with your summation. I know that to be true from my years as a Catholic.
The confusion comes from the amount of veneration given to Mary by the Catholic church. The Mary listed in scripture seems like a different person in Cathic church tradition.

No offense but that sounds like it's your problem and not the Church's if you think the amount is too much.

Can a child really love thier mother too much? Something to ponder.

I have nothing but admiration for the mother of Christ, and so did the apostles. However, other than in the gospels there is virtually no mention of her after that. If her role was supposed to be that important, why is it not recorded beyond the gospels?
I ask this question honestly, not argumentaly

Some saints and theologians have considered the lack of explicit mention in the 4 gospels might be because of her profound humility and God's choosing not to expose her but keep her as a hidden garden so to speak.

That's is just an opinion.

But there is implicit mention of her and every dogma and belief can be shown from scripture, the assumption would be the most difficult because when the gospels and letters were written it's possible she was still alive.

Also we do have the non canonized book called the Protevangelium of James also called the infancy gospel where we learn quite a bit about Mary and Joesph.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/infancyjames.html

 

[Lotar]

The source from which comes the desire to denigrate the Mother of God and those who honor her is quite clear...

Revelation 12:13
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child:

 

[IamAdopted]

The source from which comes the desire to denigrate the Mother of God and those who honor her is quite clear...

Revelation 12:13
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child:

Once again this is not Mary but Isreal. Isreal is the woman who Revelation is speaking of. In the tribulation we see where God will save 144,000 Jewish brothers and sisters. They will be fleeing to be Hidden from God. For the great dragon is after Gods chosen.

 

[Benedicta00]

Once again this is not Mary but Isreal. Isreal is the woman who Revelation is speaking of. In the tribulation we see where God will save 144,000 Jewish brothers and sisters. They will be fleeing to be Hidden from God. For the great dragon is after Gods chosen.

Are you infallible? How can you state this infallibly?

The Catholic Church doesn't even say for sure if Mary is the woman in Revelation.

We can safely assume she is and we can also say this refers to Israel and we can also believe both because Israel prefigures the Church and Mary is mother of the Church regardless if you think the Church is only Jesus' body.

 

[icedtea]

And if you wish to be a stumbling block to ppl converting to Christ one true Church, then that's between you and the Lord.

Your opinion. The one true church has no name on it.

 

[IamAdopted]

Are you infallible? How can you state this infallibly?

The Catholic Church doesn't even say for sure if Mary is the woman in Revelation.

We can safely assume she is and we can also say this refers to Israel and we can also believe both because Israel prefigures the Church and Mary is mother of the Church regardless if you think the Church is only Jesus' body.

By the study of the scripture. The old and the new.

 

[icedtea]

The source from which comes the desire to denigrate the Mother of God and those who honor her is quite clear...

Revelation 12:13
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child:

Not everyone who disagrees is from the dragon, you know.

 

[repentant]

By the study of the scripture. The old and the new.

So you are infalliable...

 

[Benedicta00]

By the study of the scripture. The old and the new.

So you are infallible, you can't err?

This is really something... you claim you have infallibility because you read the scriptures.

No one wonder you are scandalized by the pope's infallibility... He's stealing your thunder.

 

[Benedicta00]

Not everyone who disagrees is from the dragon, you know.

I think what he means is there is only one who wants to take Mary out the picture.

BTW, Lotar used to be just like some folks on here, he was converted after a while. I think he knows where you all are coming from.

 

[Hentenza]

No offense but that sounds like it's your problem and not the Church's if you think the amount is too much.

Can a child really love thier mother too much? Something to ponder.



Some saints and theologians have considered the lack of explicit mention in the 4 gospels might be because of her profound humility and God's choosing not to expose her but keep her as a hidden garden so to speak.

That's is just an opinion.

But there is implicit mention of her and every dogma and belief can be shown from scripture, the assumption would be the most difficult because when the gospels and letters were written it's possible she was still alive.

Also we do have the non canonized book called the Protevangelium of James also called the infancy gospel where we learn quite a bit about Mary and Joesph.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/infancyjames.html

My question to you on the lack of mention of Mary related to other than the four gospels. There is mention of Mary within the 4 gospels but there is virtually no mention of her after the gospels.
It would seem reasonable that if she was to play such a powerful role that the epistle writers would have made mention of this fact. I would have expected at least John to mention her role somewhere in his epistles.

Thanks for mentioning the website. I have done some reading from it before. The story depicted in Infancy Gospel of James is wonderful. However, this book was first published in the sixteen century with the earlist manuscript dating to the tird century. That would make the accuracy of this writing suspect.

God Bless

 

[Benedicta00]

Romans 6

Salute Mary, who hath laboured much among you.

I think we don't see a whole lot of it, because like the Reformers, Mary wasn't the early church's beef.

The letters were all written either to correct or to teach something they may have lacked.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

Once again this is not Mary but Isreal. Isreal is the woman who Revelation is speaking of. In the tribulation we see where God will save 144,000 Jewish brothers and sisters. They will be fleeing to be Hidden from God. For the great dragon is after Gods chosen.

I thought you supported theidea that each man can read these sciptures for themselves- and hear you are acting as a one man Magisterium.

I reject your authority to interpret scripture for me.

I can read this scriptures for myself, and it is plain as day to me that prophetic sciptures often have two interpretations, and one of those in this case is that this is Mary, the woman who gave birth to a Man child who was attempted to be killed by Herod (the flood) and then went out to the deset (Egypt) for a period.

And again, the point remains- those who dishonor the Theotokos are acting in loco Serpentis.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

My question to you on the lack of mention of Mary related to other than the four gospels. There is mention of Mary within the 4 gospels but there is virtually no mention of her after the gospels.
It would seem reasonable that if she was to play such a powerful role that the epistle writers would have made mention of this fact. I would have expected at least John to mention her role somewhere in his epistles.

Thanks for mentioning the website. I have done some reading from it before. The story depicted in Infancy Gospel of James is wonderful. However, this book was first published in the sixteen century with the earlist manuscript dating to the tird century. That would make the accuracy of this writing suspect.

God Bless

Some of the earliest scriptural manuscripts we have date later than the third century.

And so that the readers know, Iraneus speaks of the Potoevangleion, meaning that it was an historical document to him, who flourished ca 180 AD. This dates it at least to early second century.

 

[Angeldove97]

Once again this is not Mary but Isreal. Isreal is the woman who Revelation is speaking of. In the tribulation we see where God will save 144,000 Jewish brothers and sisters. They will be fleeing to be Hidden from God. For the great dragon is after Gods chosen.

By the study of the scripture. The old and the new.

Well now there you have two different interpretations, just because members may or may not agree with you, doesn't mean they're wrong.

Interesting thread btw... I haven't read enough to really post in it, but there's alot to take in.

 

[Benedicta00]

Your opinion. The one true church has no name on it.

My opinion backed by biblical and historical facts.

 

[simonthezealot]

My opinion backed by biblical and historical facts.

Riiiiggghhhttt!
Rather sketchy facts, but thats a different thread in a different subforum.

 

[Benedicta00]

Riiiiggghhhttt!
Rather sketchy facts, but thats a different thread in a different subforum.

You know what they say.. truth is merely perception. I will see the same thing one way and you will see it another. That's just the nature of the original sin beast.

Which is why of course it pleased God to give us a Church and not just a bible to read.

because God's truth is objective but truth to us , fallen folks who have sin, is subjective and a matter of perception.

So we must put away our pride which is sin, that is wanting to call the shots and assent to what God gave to us, which is HIS Church who teaches us.

His Church is not a bible where we teach ourselves.