The Immaculate Conception contradicts the gospel (2)

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

When I say what I said, you have to understand that Revelation is a perfect picture of the Mass, and we see the Ark of the Covenant, which was lost, in heaven. If you ever wonder why there are angels and sky painted in the ceiling over and behind the altar in a Catholic Church, it's a reminder that heaven touches earth during the Liturgy.

kewl the heavenly ark is indeed in heaven
Revelation 11:19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

btw chap 1-11 is repeated in 12-22 so the similarity is there

 

[bbbbbbb]

The problem is, you have to have been a Catholic to be called a heretic. So a Catholic who becomes a Baptist is a heretic (simply put). A born Baptist may believe heretical things, but is not, really, a heretic.
As to your last statement, I know. But to us, you cannot separate the two. God is the Church. We do live in a uni-verse, right? So everything is part of God's creation. Therefore, you cannot separate the two. I know you don't see it that way, though.

Thank you for the fair reply. Yes, I know your view of the uni-verse.

 

[bbbbbbb]

St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed".
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Heresy

Thank you for the definition. From that, would you say that Protestants who never were Catholics, but hold to Protestant doctrines are, indeed, heretics? That seems to contradict the definition given earlier by Root of Jesse.

 

[concretecamper]

Thank you for the definition. From that, would you say that Protestants who never were Catholics, but hold to Protestant doctrines are, indeed, heretics? That seems to contradict the definition given earlier by Root of Jesse.

I think it is pretty clear.....don't you?

 

[Root of Jesse]

kewl the heavenly ark is indeed in heaven
Revelation 11:19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

btw chap 1-11 is repeated in 12-22 so the similarity is there

Well, yes. But you do understand that we see Mary as the Ark of the Covenant, which is in heaven, right? That's what the Assumption is all about, right there in Revelation 11:19. And just following that we see her, the woman clothed with the sun and the moon underneath her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars...

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Well, yes. But you do understand that we see Mary as the Ark of the Covenant, which is in heaven, right? That's what the Assumption is all about, right there in Revelation 11:19. And just following that we see her, the woman clothed with the sun and the moon underneath her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars...

Since 12 begins with a more indepth look at what began in chap 1 it therefor goes deeper than what can be explained of course. There's a video on youtube "the star of bethlehem Rick Lawson" that shows the birth of Christ according to the woman. Chapter 1 shows the opening scene in heaven with the slain lamb not yet crowned (But now that's into a-pre-mid-post povs.) and returns to the scene in heaven in 11:19. Mary being the ark in heaven isn't a belief I hold to however and is where the Catholic and Protestants part in belief systems.

As the heavenly counterpart of what is seen in Heb 9:4

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Since 12 begins with a more indepth look at what began in chap 1 it therefor goes deeper than what can be explained of course. There's a video on youtube "the star of bethlehem Rick Lawson" that shows the birth of Christ according to the woman. Chapter 1 shows the opening scene in heaven with the slain lamb not yet crowned (But now that's into a-pre-mid-post povs.) and returns to the scene in heaven in 11:19. Mary being the ark in heaven isn't a belief I hold to however and is where the Catholic and Protestants part in belief systems.

As the heavenly counterpart of what is seen in Heb 9:4

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

I'm very familiar with Rick Lawson's Star of Bethlehem-in fact I believe he's right.
Regarding Mary being the ark, isn't it interesting that Rev 11:19 speaks of the ark, which had been lost for centuries, and almost immediately "changes the subject" to Mary?

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

I'm very familiar with Rick Lawson's Star of Bethlehem-in fact I believe he's right.
Regarding Mary being the ark, isn't it interesting that Rev 11:19 speaks of the ark, which had been lost for centuries, and almost immediately "changes the subject" to Mary?

Your missing my point of 'in the beginning'...God created male and female He created them...what chapter was that? God created Adam then Eve ... what chapter was that? was that 2 different creation stories or was that the same story retold in detail? Revelations. to be understood properly imho has to be read chap 1-11 and then reiterated at 12-22

No I don't think it changes the subject matter just goes into more depth of detail

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

The problem is, you have to have been a Catholic to be called a heretic. So a Catholic who becomes a Baptist is a heretic (simply put). A born Baptist may believe heretical things, but is not, really, a heretic.
As to your last statement, I know. But to us, you cannot separate the two. God is the Church. We do live in a uni-verse, right? So everything is part of God's creation. Therefore, you cannot separate the two. I know you don't see it that way, though.

That may be more easily explained using Eschatology. The OT wife is not the bride but the friend of the bridegroom. Hence much reference to Israel in Revelations. We can see from the final chapter of that book that all will be one in God in eternity. So the church at this time is seen thru Christ who is God but has separated Himself in time away from His previous work to complete a new work in God, for the purpose that all will be in all.

The subject has strayed beyond into what could get it moved to another forum, carry on

 

[Root of Jesse]

The subject has strayed beyond into what could get it moved to another forum, carry on

Except that Mary would not be in heaven if she'd had the stain of sin on her...

 

[bbbbbbb]

I think it is pretty clear.....don't you?

Actually, yes, I do, and thought so until Root of Jesse corrected me.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The problem is, you have to have been a Catholic to be called a heretic. So a Catholic who becomes a Baptist is a heretic (simply put). A born Baptist may believe heretical things, but is not, really, a heretic.
As to your last statement, I know. But to us, you cannot separate the two. God is the Church. We do live in a uni-verse, right? So everything is part of God's creation. Therefore, you cannot separate the two. I know you don't see it that way, though.

Would you care to comment on Concretecamper's post #39?

St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed".
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Heresy

 

[Standing Up]

Well, yes. But you do understand that we see Mary as the Ark of the Covenant, which is in heaven, right? That's what the Assumption is all about, right there in Revelation 11:19. And just following that we see her, the woman clothed with the sun and the moon underneath her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars...

In RC Marian theology, it is impossible for Rev. 12:1-2 to be a picture of Mary.

RC theology: Mary did not experience the curse of pain in childbirth
Rev. 12:1-2: this woman travailed in birth and was pained to be delivered

However, if you want Rev 12:1-2 to be about Mary, then you'd have to agree she pained in birth (no more ever-virgin).

 

[Defensor Christi]

Would you care to comment on Concretecamper's post #39?

St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed".
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Heresy

If I may chime in here...the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches...


817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

The opinions if individual Catholics (Great Saints or not) are not binding upon the Church...hope that helps!!

 

[Defensor Christi]

In RC Marian theology, it is impossible for Rev. 12:1-2 to be a picture of Mary.

RC theology: Mary did not experience the curse of pain in childbirth
Rev. 12:1-2: this woman travailed in birth and was pained to be delivered

However, if you want Rev 12:1-2 to be about Mary, then you'd have to agree she pained in birth (no more ever-virgin).

I find this answer to be enlightening....

This passage describes a woman clothed with the sun and crowned with 12 stars. Revelation 12:2 describes the woman as undergoing pangs of childbirth. You asked how the Church could use this passage in its defense of honoring Mary when the woman is described as having birth pangs. In other words, how can the Church reconcile its teaching that Mary didn’t experience labor pains with this passage from Revelation 12? Scripture is traditionally interpreted in four senses (please see our Faith Fact, Scripture Sense): literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical. God not only teaches through words (literally), but also through the things, people, and events mentioned in scripture (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 115-19).

Hence, the woman in Revelation 12:2 has more than one meaning. On a most basic, literal level, we observe a woman, a child, and a dragon. However, the information conveyed indicates that these are Mary, Jesus, and the devil, respectively. In a spiritual sense, she is also Zion, Jerusalem, with her 12 stars, bringing forth the messianic era with the pangs of childbirth (cf. Isaiah 26:17). The woman is also the Church who gives birth to children of God (Mary herself is a figure or image of the Church). Mary is also the Mother of the Church that was born on Calvary, clearly in Mary’s pain (cf. Luke 2:34-35; Catechism, no. 766).

Thus, the Blessed Virgin Mother does not have pangs at Jesus’ miraculous birth into the world; rather, her “birth pangs” are deferred to the suffering she shares with Him on the Cross, as he is born into eternal glory. Indeed, Jesus takes up His throne only after he is glorified through His victory on Calvary. By sharing in her Son’s suffering, Mary also becomes the Mother of all His followers, i.e., the Body of Christ (Revelation 12:17), and thus the Mother of the Church. For those who argue for a more literal interpretation of Revelation 12, saying that Mary did have such labor pains, they would also have to believe that the devil was present in Bethlehem at Jesus’ birth as a dragon, ready to devour Jesus; that Jesus was swept up to heaven to safety upon His birth; and that Mary took refuge in the wilderness because of the devil’s threat. None of this, of course, is substantiated in the infancy narratives of the gospels. Given the figurative nature of the Book of Revelation, we need to rely on the God-given Magisterium to properly interpret it (Catechism, nos. 84-87).

Did Mary Experience Labor Pains?

 

[MrMoe]

The woman is also the Church who gives birth to children of God (Mary herself is a figure or image of the Church).

That would mean the church also gave birth the man child which is Jesus.

Watch the video below to hear why the woman cannot be the church.

Mary is also the Mother of the Church that was born on Calvary, clearly in Mary’s pain (cf. Luke 2:34-35; Catechism, no. 766).

So which one is it? Did the church give birth to messiah or did messiah give birth to the church. It can't be both.

Thus, the Blessed Virgin Mother does not have pangs at Jesus’ miraculous birth into the world; rather, her “birth pangs” are deferred to the suffering she shares with Him on the Cross, as he is born into eternal glory. Indeed, Jesus takes up His throne only after he is glorified through His victory on Calvary.

Defer: To put off; postpone. Synonyms: defer, postpone, shelve, stay, suspend. (Thefreedictionary.com)

Sorry but you can't do that. You can't "defer" what a verse is stating to make it fit your narrative. These verses are in reference to a woman having birth pangs and giving birth to a man child. (Rev 12:2-5) Jesus was no longer a child when he was on the cross at Calvary.

By sharing in her Son’s suffering, Mary also becomes the Mother of all His followers, i.e., the Body of Christ (Revelation 12:17), and thus the Mother of the Church.

Firstly, this is a logical non sequitur. Secondly, Mary probably did suffer but she certainly did not share her son's suffering. She was not lashed, humiliated and hung on a cross. Neither was she made to be sin for us so that we might become the righteousness of God in her (2 Corinthians 5:21)

For those who argue for a more literal interpretation of Revelation 12, saying that Mary did have such labor pains, they would also have to believe that the devil was present in Bethlehem at Jesus’ birth as a dragon, ready to devour Jesus; that Jesus was swept up to heaven to safety upon His birth; and that Mary took refuge in the wilderness because of the devil’s threat. None of this, of course, is substantiated in the infancy narratives of the gospels. Given the figurative nature of the Book of Revelation, we need to rely on the God-given Magisterium to properly interpret it (Catechism, nos. 84-87).

Did Mary Experience Labor Pains?

So Jesus came down from heaven only to be swept up to heaven again right after his birth? ...Yeah, that sounds very unlikely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Cu0LkglQgw

 

[concretecamper]

If I may chime in here...the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches...


817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

The opinions if individual Catholics (Great Saints or not) are not binding upon the Church...hope that helps!!

I do not see any difference between what the CCC says and what St. Thomas says.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

I find this answer to be enlightening....

This passage describes a woman clothed with the sun and crowned with 12 stars. Revelation 12:2 describes the woman as undergoing pangs of childbirth. You asked how the Church could use this passage in its defense of honoring Mary when the woman is described as having birth pangs. In other words, how can the Church reconcile its teaching that Mary didn’t experience labor pains with this passage from Revelation 12? Scripture is traditionally interpreted in four senses (please see our Faith Fact, Scripture Sense): literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical. God not only teaches through words (literally), but also through the things, people, and events mentioned in scripture (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 115-19).

Hence, the woman in Revelation 12:2 has more than one meaning. On a most basic, literal level, we observe a woman, a child, and a dragon. However, the information conveyed indicates that these are Mary, Jesus, and the devil, respectively. In a spiritual sense, she is also Zion, Jerusalem, with her 12 stars, bringing forth the messianic era with the pangs of childbirth (cf. Isaiah 26:17). The woman is also the Church who gives birth to children of God (Mary herself is a figure or image of the Church). Mary is also the Mother of the Church that was born on Calvary, clearly in Mary’s pain (cf. Luke 2:34-35; Catechism, no. 766).

Thus, the Blessed Virgin Mother does not have pangs at Jesus’ miraculous birth into the world; rather, her “birth pangs” are deferred to the suffering she shares with Him on the Cross, as he is born into eternal glory. Indeed, Jesus takes up His throne only after he is glorified through His victory on Calvary. By sharing in her Son’s suffering, Mary also becomes the Mother of all His followers, i.e., the Body of Christ (Revelation 12:17), and thus the Mother of the Church.For those who argue for a more literal interpretation of Revelation 12, saying that Mary did have such labor pains, they would also have to believe that the devil was present in Bethlehem at Jesus’ birth as a dragon, ready to devour Jesus; that Jesus was swept up to heaven to safety upon His birth; and that Mary took refuge in the wilderness because of the devil’s threat. None of this, of course, is substantiated in the infancy narratives of the gospels. Given the figurative nature of the Book of Revelation, we need to rely on the God-given Magisterium to properly interpret it (Catechism, nos. 84-87).

Did Mary Experience Labor Pains?

I differ with you on this point because of the prophesy of Racheal's children that came to pass. We see times involved in the Rev account.

 

[Standing Up]

-snip-

Thus, the Blessed Virgin Mother does not have pangs at Jesus’ miraculous birth into the world; rather, her “birth pangs” are deferred to the suffering she shares with Him on the Cross, as he is born into eternal glory.-snip-

At least we are on the same page that RC teaches Mary did not have birth pangs.

 

[Albion]

At least we are on the same page that RC teaches Mary did not have birth pangs.

Now that that's settled, I think it naturally raises this question:

Why would the Son of God require a human mother at all, if he was not going to be born in the way that all other humans are born?

He could just as well have been found under a cabbage leaf or materialized somewhere and gone on from there with his mission.