The last recorded words of Mary

[tonychanyt]

At the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:

5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Those were the last quoted words of Mary, mother of Jesus.

That happened at the beginning of Jesus' public ministry. After that, she appeared periodically throughout the gospel accounts, but her words were not quoted again.

The last explicit mention of her name was in Ac 1:

14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

Acts 2:

1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place.

Mary was likely among them. The Holy Spirit fell on people and they spoke in tongues. There was no record of any words from Mary. After that, Mary faded from the recording of the acts of the apostles/disciples.

My advice to Catholics is: "Do whatever Jesus tells you." Mary would have said the same thing to you if you asked her.

 

[Clare73]

At the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:
Those were the last quoted words of Mary, mother of Jesus.
That happened at the beginning of Jesus' public ministry. After that, she appeared periodically throughout the gospel accounts, but her words were not quoted again.
The last explicit mention of her name was in Ac 1:
Acts 2: Mary was likely among them.

The text reports only the apostles being there (Ac 1:2, 12-13, 2:1).

The Holy Spirit fell on people and they spoke in tongues. There was no record of any words from Mary. After that, Mary faded from the recording of the acts of the apostles/disciples.

My advice to Catholics is: "Do whatever Jesus tells you." Mary would have said the same thing to you if you asked her.

 

[concretecamper]

My advice to Catholics is: "Do whatever Jesus tells you." Mary would have said the same thing to you if you asked her.

This advice from The Blessed Mother applies to all.

 

[concretecamper]

Interesting commentary on the Wedding Feast by Bishop Fulton Sheen

There were, in His life, two occasions when His human nature seemed to show an unwillingness to take on His burden of suffering. In the Garden, He asked His Father if it be possible to take away His chalice of woe. But He immediately afterward acquiesced in His Father’s will: “Not My will, but Thine be done.” The same apparent reluctance was also manifested in the face of the will of His mother. Cana was a rehearsal for Golgotha. He was not questioning the wisdom of beginning His Public Life and going to death at this particular point in time; it was rather a question of submitting His reluctant human nature to obedience to the Cross. There is a striking parallel between His Father’s bidding Him to His public death and His mother’s bidding Him to His public life. Obedience triumphed in both cases; at Cana, the water was changed into wine; at Calvary, the wine was changed into blood. He was telling His mother that she was virtually pronouncing a sentence of death over Him. Few are the mothers who send their sons to battlefields; but here was one who was actually hastening the hour of her Son’s mortal conflict with the forces of evil. If He agreed to her request, He would be beginning His hour of death and glorification. To the Cross He would go with double commission, one from His Father in heaven, the other from His mother on earth

 

[Clare73]

Interesting commentary on the Wedding Feast by Bishop Fulton Sheen

There were, in His life, two occasions when His human nature seemed to show an unwillingness to take on His burden of suffering. In the Garden, He asked His Father if it be possible to take away His chalice of woe. But He immediately afterward acquiesced in His Father’s will: “Not My will, but Thine be done.” The same apparent reluctance was also manifested in the face of the will of His mother. Cana was a rehearsal for Golgotha. He was not questioning the wisdom of beginning His Public Life and going to death at this particular point in time; it was rather a question of submitting His reluctant human nature to obedience to the Cross. There is a striking parallel between His Father’s bidding Him to His public death and His mother’s bidding Him to His public life. Obedience triumphed in both cases; at Cana, the water was changed into wine; at Calvary, the wine was changed into blood.

He was telling His mother that she was virtually pronouncing a sentence of death over Him. Few are the mothers who send their sons to battlefields; but here was one who was actually hastening the hour of her Son’s mortal conflict with the forces of evil. If He agreed to her request, He would be beginning His hour of death and glorification. To the Cross He would go with double commission, one from His Father in heaven, the other from His mother on earth

Sounds like an attempt to personally involve Mary in the ransom on the cross (i.e. salvation for those who believe in Jesus Christ).

Salvation belongs to God alone! (Rev 7:10)

 

[concretecamper]

Sounds like an attempt to personally involve Mary in the ransom on the cross; i.e. salvation for those who believe in Jesus Christ.

Salvation belongs to God alone! (Rev 7:10)

Of course you would twist it in that manner. Par for the course.

 

[Clare73]

Of course you would twist it in that manner. Par for the course.

If you can't see mine is an implication of that statement, you are not understanding the meaning of "salvation is God's alone."

That makes for a loose theology.

 

[concretecamper]

If you can't see mine is an implication of that statement, you are not understanding the meaning of "salvation is God's alone."

That makes for a loose theology.

I can see you are adding to what I posted to make it mean something it is not. We are all getting use to your tactics. That makes for bad theology.

 

[Clare73]

I can see you are adding to what I posted to make it mean something it is not. We are all getting use to your tactics. That makes for bad theology.

You must demonstrate how mine could not be an implication of Sheen's statement.

In fact, if I have it straight, Co-Redemptrix rings a bell.

 

[concretecamper]

You must demonstrate how mine could not be an implication of Sheen's statement.

In fact, if I have it straight, Co-Redemptrix rings a bell.

If you could elaborate on what you are trying to say, and prove that you are not adding to what he is saying, maybe I'll give it a shot.

So far, you expressed your opinion without any backup.

 

[Clare73]

If you could elaborate on what you are trying to say, and prove that you are not adding to what he is saying, maybe I'll give it a shot.

So far, you expressed your opinion without any backup.

To the Cross He would go with double commission, one from His Father in heaven, the other from His mother on earth.

That gives Mary an authoritative role in redemption.

Impreciseness allows for error in theology.

 

[concretecamper]

To the Cross He would go with double commission, one from His Father in heaven, the other from His mother on earth.

That gives Mary an authoritative role in redemption.

Impreciseness allows for error in theology.

Jesus fulfilled the 4th Commandment perfectly. So of Jesus honoring His Mother perfectly makes you uncomfortable, I can't help with that.

If you research the Hebrew word for Honor (Kabed), it may shed some light on what fulfilling the 4th Commandment actually entailed.

Her having an authoritative role IS NOT the same as Co-Redemptrix.

So you see, you added to what Bishop Sheen wrote. His theology is spot on, maybe it's your comprehension.

 

[Clare73]

Jesus fulfilled the 4th Commandment perfectly. So of Jesus honoring His Mother perfectly makes you uncomfortable, I can't help with that.

And you demonstrate my point.
You seek through the fourth commandment to involve Mary in redemption, which is by God alone.

If you research the Hebrew word for Honor (Kabed), it may shed some light on what fulfilling the 4th Commandment actually entailed.

Her having an authoritative role IS NOT the same as Co-Redemptrix.

Perhaps you could explain what Co-Redemptrix means.

 

[concretecamper]

And you demonstrate my point.
You seek through the fourth commandment to involve Mary in redemption, which is by God alone

Nope. If Jesus fulfilling the fourth Commandment makes you feel uncomfortable, then I can't help you with that.

Perhaps you could explain what Co-Redemptrix means.

Not the topic of this thread. If you would like to start another thread, be my guest

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Interesting commentary on the Wedding Feast by Bishop Fulton Sheen

There were, in His life, two occasions when His human nature seemed to show an unwillingness to take on His burden of suffering. In the Garden, He asked His Father if it be possible to take away His chalice of woe. But He immediately afterward acquiesced in His Father’s will: “Not My will, but Thine be done.” The same apparent reluctance was also manifested in the face of the will of His mother. Cana was a rehearsal for Golgotha. He was not questioning the wisdom of beginning His Public Life and going to death at this particular point in time; it was rather a question of submitting His reluctant human nature to obedience to the Cross. There is a striking parallel between His Father’s bidding Him to His public death and His mother’s bidding Him to His public life. Obedience triumphed in both cases; at Cana, the water was changed into wine; at Calvary, the wine was changed into blood. He was telling His mother that she was virtually pronouncing a sentence of death over Him. Few are the mothers who send their sons to battlefields; but here was one who was actually hastening the hour of her Son’s mortal conflict with the forces of evil. If He agreed to her request, He would be beginning His hour of death and glorification. To the Cross He would go with double commission, one from His Father in heaven, the other from His mother on earth

While that is a possible parallel, I would not make too much of it. Mary did not command Jesus to change the water into wine. In the end Mary told the waiters to do whatever Jesus said which could have been nothing. She left it up to him. Hers was a request not a command. Going to the cross was the whole reason for the incarnation. That was a command. Saying that Mary's request was "virtually pronouncing a sentence of death over Him" is a reach in my opinion. He is entitled to his opinion and unless he is trying to equate Mary's request to God's command I will leave him to his observation.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Nope. If Jesus fulfilling the fourth Commandment makes you feel uncomfortable, then I can't help you with that.

Not the topic of this thread. If you would like to start another thread, be my guest

It's interesting that in different OT's they count the 10 Commandments differently. To me, the commandment to honor your father and your mother is the 5th commandment. Not that it matters. It just depends on how you group certain statements.

God used many people in accomplishing His plan of redemption. Even Pilot was used yet we don't think of him as being part of the plan of redemption but in a way he was. You might argue that if Pilot had not condemned him, another Roman ruler might have but likewise some other event might have sparked the beginning of Jesus' public ministry. Let's not forget Judas Iscariot. He certainly played a role as did the Sanhedrin. They all played a role. However, only Jesus fulfilled the plan of redemption as only His blood could cover our sins. Everyone else played a role, even a critical role, but they were bit players so-to-speak. I don't mean that in any disrespect to Mary's role. She and Joseph played major roles in Jesus' life but in the end it was Jesus who hung on the cross and His blood that redeems us from our sins. In that He has no "co" anything.