CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group

CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group (http://www.catholicplanet.net/forum/index.php)
-   Apologetics (http://www.catholicplanet.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   A defense of Mary (http://www.catholicplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=224)

Mario 2nd July 2006 02:28 AM

A defense of Mary
 
I came across a Protestant board which was attacking the privileges of Mary as revealed by the Catholic Church, and got fed up becuse of my love for Our Lady.

One of their members sent a simple post which screamed (font 20):

WOMAN, WHAT HAVE i TO DO WITH YOU!

This was my response

_____________________________________






In another thread, a member used this partial quote from Jn 2:4 to express the truth that Christ does not want anyone to worship his mother. However, taking these words out of context horribly detracts from the significance of this passage, so I thought I would expand my thoughts here.

The complete verse states: Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

A little background: Jesus, his mother, and his first few disciples are present at a wedding feast in Cana. With the uncanny ability that women possess, Mary is sensitive to the needs of the new couple and is concerned when she realizes that the wine has run out in the middle of the feast. Knowing her son as she does, she approaches and informs Jesus that there is no wine. Ultimately, Christ works his first miracle recorded in John's Gospel, and saves the wedding party from a great embarrassment:

Jn 2:11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

But this was only a glimpse of Jesus' glory, which takes us back to the gentle rebuke of verse 4. Again, Jesus said,
...Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

You see, Mary wants her son to show a glimmer of his glory out of consideration for the couple, while Jesus wants to point to the hour of his glory. In Jn 12, a few days before his death on the Cross, Jesus states:

Jn 12: 23,27 ...the hour is come that the Son of man should be glorified...Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.

The hour of Christ's agony is the hour of Christ's glory, the fulfilment of the Father's will.

Back to the wedding; it's as if Jesus is reminding his mother and us to stay focused on what he would accomplish on Good Friday, his glory, the expiation of our sins!

Wow, that took longer than I thought! But here is another point. Mary appears only 2 times in John, and both times Jesus addresses her as Woman and both times his hour of glory is referenced (see Jn 19:26).
Why does he call his Mom, "Woman"? Because Mary is the fulfilment of Gen 3:15:
God speaks to the serpent, Satan, ...And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed.

Wait a minute! Aren't we in the Garden of Eden, and isn't the woman, Eve? No, not in this verse. Why not? Because this is the only time in the Bible that physical offspring is referred to as a woman's seed. Every other example of physical offspring is referred to as the man's seed. For instance, God says to Abraham in Gen 9:9, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you.

Remember, Mary does not have relations with Joseph to conceive Jesus.
Mt 1:20 ...behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

and in Mt 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus...

Jesus is of Mary's seed, humanly speaking, because no man was involved!

So, you may ask?

This illustrates the significance of Jn 2:4. The most important moment in Jesus' life is his hour of glory when he could say, "It is finished!" And one of those to witness that was the Woman, his mother. She also witnessed the fulfilment of the other half of Gen 3:15:
...it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise it's heel.

or as Heb 2:14 states: Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.

Alleluia!

And why did the devil only bruise the heel of the Woman's seed; because Jesus is risen and lives forever to make intercession!

Did I say, "Alleluia"? ALLELUIA!
_________________

Ron Conte 2nd July 2006 02:53 AM

I'll add a few thoughts on Mary and the Wedding at Cana.

Mary is the perfect disciple of Christ.
She is entirely obedient to God.
Therefore, Christ gives her whatever she asks.
Obedience between Christ and Mary is reciprocal and assymetrical.
She is obedient to him, and he is obedient to her: reciprocal.
But He is the head of the Church and she is the figure of the Church.
He is only obedient to her in the sense of granting her requests due to her subordinate obedience to Him: assymetrical.

Cana was the first Sacrament of Marriage.
Christ changed the old wine of the Old Testament marriage into the new wine of the Sacrament of Marriage (New Testament).

Mary was not so much concerned about a lack of wine. When she said, 'they have no wine,' she meant that they lacked a true and full Sacrament of Marriage.

When Christ replied that His time had not yet come, He meant that he had not yet suffered and died so as to provide the graces from which the Sacraments flow.

But she knew that as the Son of God, Christ could still grant her request. And so He did.


Ron Conte

Padraig 2nd July 2006 07:49 AM

The Church exhausts itself praising Mary, so should we.

cocatholic 14th July 2006 05:50 PM

Mario I think we both know which board it is. Taking Pope Pius XI and John Paul II out of context because of the title "Queen of Heaven", etc, etc.

What they fail to see, is when we recite the sign of the Cross. It is only the 3 Divine persons of the Holy Trinity and does not include Mary. This is the same sign of the Cross that is a precursor and concludes the recitation of the "Hail Mary" and every other prayer.

When we state the Profession of Faith it's, "He was born of the virgin Mary and became man." Virgin Mary and Divine Mary would be 2 different statements.

There is a distinct difference between worshipping Mary and having an adoration towards her and giving her the due respect she deserves.

They just really irked me because they take everything of the Roman Catholic faith out of context. Not the first time the Vatican has been criticized. Sometimes I think people seek out potential flaws in statements by the Church and linguistics. Fundamentally they need to first look at one basic fact by answering a simple question...

From Whom does the Roman Catholic Church come from? Once answered accurately, one should proceed with great caution before questioning the tenants thereof. Most agree challenging a judge in their courtroom would be similar to walking a dangerous line. The same applies.

On a similar note, while I don't observe the Judaic faith, I have a high level of respect for a religion whose people are God's chosen. Slamming their belief system would accomplish nothing.

True that no one can come before the Father except through Christ alone, but we hail Mary because she is favored among women and had a close relationship with Our Lord.

Sorry for the ranting tangent.

III Nuns 20th July 2006 11:06 PM

It's amazing how offended we as humans can get when someone talks about our own mothers.

How offended do you think Christ is when our Protestant brothers and sisters (not literally of course :lol: ) degrade Our Lady so?

Pio Yap Jr. 26th July 2006 02:40 PM

When will our non-Catholic brothers and sisters realize that their interpretation of what Jesus said in the Holy Scripture degrades not just Mary but Jesus also?

Pio Yap

themilitantcatholic 27th July 2006 03:37 AM

Pio, You ask "when",

I'll tell you when,

When they shed their spiritual pride.

Padraig 27th July 2006 06:03 AM

I had a very interesting conversation with a very good Baptist in our Parish one time. Brian told me he had been a Catolic when he was young and had later become a Baptist. When I asked him why he told me that it was because the Church was theologically wrong. I asked him to explain and several of the things he said concerned Our Lady incuding the 'fact' that we 'adored' her. I pointed out that The Church didn't teach these things.

But, you know people believe what they want. However I wonder if Brian ever really was taught properly in the first place.

Justin Angel 8th September 2008 06:00 AM

"Woman"
 
When Jesus used the title "woman" (gnyai), it served as a title of respect and dignity. Jesus would never have dismissed the fourth commandment by rebuking his mother in public and thereby dishonouring her. Jesus' question actually was intended to invite his mother to solicit him and intercede on behalf of the wedding guests. It is more a declaration of acknowledgement than a question: the hour has arrived at last for Jesus to begin his ministry under the shadow of the cross; his mother's concern does in fact affect him. Bishop Fulton J Sheen saw our Lord's question as his way of reminding his mother that from this point on their relationship will never be as it was; Mary must now let go of her Son and give him to us in marriage as bride and groom: the bride being the Church. Jesus reciprocated by giving his mother to us true believers and disciples from the cross.

PAX
J.A. :cool:

Mary's Child 8th September 2008 10:13 PM

Mario,

I think you did a great job defending Our Lady and her role as our mother.

Thanks!

Thurifer 26th February 2010 02:58 AM

My Mom
 
I always try to complete the first 5 saturdays in reparations to the outrages committed against her.

Lazarus 26th February 2010 08:38 PM

How sweet it is to have a spiritual mother!
 
In almost every parish here in Los Angeles, there is always an image of Our Lady of Guadalupe. In my own parish, it is in the outdoor and is always in abundance with bouquets of fresh flowers and votive candles burning 24/7. Parishioners do pay visits and homage all day long and at all hours of the night. After my daily Mass, I drop by and hand her over all my troubles in this life - the past, the present, and the future - all my cares, worries and aspirations, just about everything!

I do feel sorry for many in the Protestants who do not have this privileges of the sweetness of the Catholic faith.

TheGiftOfLife 27th February 2010 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thurifer (Post 30736)
I always try to complete the first 5 saturdays in reparations to the outrages committed against her.


This coming First Saturday will be my 5th.

Also, due to the massive snow storm here in NYC, the 7:30 AM Mass today included the Priest and myself. I served the Mass at the altar with the Priest and did the reading. I also asked him if I could get both species as they no longer do this in my diocese. I was thrilled to receive Christ more fully today during lent!

Obviously I'm in a good mood!

myLivingBread 16th November 2010 06:53 AM

Why does the Catholic appeal to the fact that Mary was "blessed among women" in support of their belief she was sinless when Deborah was "blessed above women"?

And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women (Luke 1:28).

Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent (Judges 5:24).

Ron Conte 16th November 2010 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myLivingBread (Post 34985)
Why does the Catholic appeal to the fact that Mary was "blessed among women" in support of their belief she was sinless when Deborah was "blessed above women"?

And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women (Luke 1:28).

Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent (Judges 5:24).


Some of the women of the OT were figures, foreshadowing the Virgin Mary by helping to save Israel, just as Mary helps Christ to save us all.

The expression blessed among women is a superlative, which can be applied to a number of different women. That superlative reaches its height and perfection only in Mary. The expression is one support in Scripture for her perfection, but it is not the sole support.

Brother 16th November 2010 05:32 PM

Jael was blessed among women just as any other woman, who is holy, can be blessed among other women who are not that holy. A particular woman is blessed because of her relationship with God and her good deeds, in comparison with other women who don't have that relationship, and therefore, that 'blessing'.

However, an Archangel was directly send by God to send her the following message:

{1:28} And upon entering, the Angel said to her: “Hail, full of grace. The Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women.”

"Full of grace", meaning that no sin has space in her being, and therefore, she is blessed among all other women because no other woman is "full of grace", and therefore, sinless, as Mary is.

And then this expression is repeated again to confirm what the Angel has told her:

{1:41} And it happened that, as Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
{1:42} And she cried out with a loud voice and said: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.

Notice that Elizabeth said those words when she was 'filled' with the Holy Spirit, so it was God Himself who told that to Mary thru Elizabeth.

Also, notice that when Mary met Elizabeth, Mary was pregnant! and according to the old law she would be considered an 'unclean' woman [Lev 12:2 and on..]; but still, she told her "blessed are you among women", this implies her miraculous virgin incarnation of her Son in her womb "and blessed is the fruit of your womb" this implies that her Son is God. Therefore, Mary is blessed among 'all' other women of the world who are not able to conceive with that unique immaculate/miracle. Mary had to conceive in a immaculate - 'clean' way in order for her not to be called 'unclean' or 'impure' - for if she would have conceived naturally - like all other women, then Mary would also be considered an 'unclean' woman, not 'blessed'. Also, her Son was not born the natural way either, but a clean way, because He was also called 'blessed'.

Then Mary sings and prays:

{1:48} For he has looked with favor on the humility of his handmaid. For behold, from this time, all generations shall call me blessed.

Mary is blessed among woman of all generations, past, present and future and all generations shall call her blessed in this life and the next.

The blessing of Mary surpases by far the blessing of Jael or of any other holy woman and men of all generations.

myLivingBread 17th November 2010 12:35 AM

Not true. How can it reach it's height in Mary since she is blessed "among" women which means equally among others that are blessed while to be blessed "above" women, as was Deborah, sets one higher than equality?

sammy 17th November 2010 02:31 AM

CPDV

Judges 5:24

Blessed among women is Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite. And blessed is she in her tabernacle.

Ron Conte 17th November 2010 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myLivingBread (Post 34999)
Not true. How can it reach it's height in Mary since she is blessed "among" women which means equally among others that are blessed while to be blessed "above" women, as was Deborah, sets one higher than equality?


The text does not say 'Deborah' but 'Jael' -- these are two different women.

Although you might find a translation that says 'above women', there is nothing in the text itself in Latin to justify using 'above' for Jael.

{5:24} Benedicta inter mulieres Iahel uxor Haber Cinći, et benedicatur in tabernaculo suo.
{5:24} Blessed among women is Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite. And blessed is she in her tabernacle.

Also, the Hebrew interlinear text does not have a word meaning 'above', but only the word 'women' conjugated as 'from women' or 'of women'.

The term 'blessed among women' is an expression, a figure of speech, indicating a superlative. But a superlative can have either of two meanings:
1. very much so
2. more so than all others

So when Christ said that the mustard seed is the smallest (superlative) seed, He meant very much so (very small). He was not asserting that it is the smallest of all seeds.

When the OT says that Jael is a superlative woman, it means very much so. When the NT says that Mary is a superlative woman, it means more so than all others.
The interpretation is based not only on the text of Scripture, but on Tradition and Magisterium as well.

myLivingBread 17th November 2010 01:09 PM

Ok Deborah and not Jael...thank you - your correction is appreciated.
I don't have access to my Hebrew Bible for some time but I intend to check.
So you insist that Mary MUST be above women with zero support form the text but because RCC told you so or someone else told you?

myLivingBread 22nd November 2010 01:21 AM

Ron,

this questions:

How can Mary be exalted ABOVE Christians when the RCC asserts that Peter is the vicar of Christ and HEAD of the church? Mary indeed is part of that church.
(Christians, acording John 1:16, are full of grace)

In the Bible we read that Christ (the Creator God) committed no sin. This point is taught several times. If this is also true of Mary (and she being a created being) why isn't it expressed as it is with Christ? Is the creature being exalted over the Creator? If not, then please explain.

So even though Peter was the "head" another mere human being was above him. Mary is exalted "above" Christian. Peter was a Christian and the "head" of the church and yet Mary is exalted above him

Ron Conte 22nd November 2010 02:15 AM

"How can Mary be exalted ABOVE Christians when the RCC asserts that Peter is the vicar of Christ and HEAD of the church? Mary indeed is part of that church."

Peter has the role to be the head of the Church on behalf of Christ.
Mary has a different role, to assist Christ in all that He does for our salvation.
Mary is holier than Peter, but she still cannot have his role.
Each person has their own place in God's plan.
Mary is holier than any other mere human person, but that does not mean that she is above (as if apart from) us. She is united with us in the Church and in Christ.

"In the Bible we read that Christ (the Creator God) committed no sin. This point is taught several times. If this is also true of Mary (and she being a created being) why isn't it expressed as it is with Christ? Is the creature being exalted over the Creator? If not, then please explain. "

Christ is sinless, and Mary is sinless. But Christ in his human nature is still greater than Mary. A baptized infant is sinless, but a holy adult is greater in the eyes of God than a baptized infant.

Christ is also God, whereas Mary is not God. So even though both are sinless, Christ is still above Mary, as Her Creator.

"So even though Peter was the "head" another mere human being was above him. Mary is exalted "above" Christian. Peter was a Christian and the "head" of the church and yet Mary is exalted above him"

Mary was obedient to Joseph, in the holy family, even though she is holier than he is. Similarly, Mary was obedient to Peter and to the Church, even though she was holier than the Pope. She is not simply 'above' -- it is more complex and subtle than that. Saying she is 'above' is an over simplification.

Christ is the head of the Church. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, i.e. his representative, the person taking his place until he returns. So the Pope is only the head of the Church is a restricted sense.

Brother 22nd November 2010 04:07 PM

Mary is the mother of our King, the King of kings and the King of all of us; therefore, she is our Queen.

Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ and we form part of the mystical Body of Christ; therefore, she is our Mother also (including the Pope's).

myLivingBread 3rd January 2011 10:54 PM

It is not the subject of discussion wether if the Assumption of Mary is biblical or not. Rather, we will discuss if the doctrine really did originate from the apostles and if there are early church fathers who know this doctrine.

You see, Protestants are being criticized that our doctrines are neither apostolic nor historical. Now, let's see if this doctrine conform to the standards of the Roman Catholic doctrine.

Please show me evidences from the early church fathers affirming the Bodily Assumption of Mary.

Ron Conte 4th January 2011 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myLivingBread (Post 35543)
It is not the subject of discussion wether if the Assumption of Mary is biblical or not. Rather, we will discuss if the doctrine really did originate from the apostles and if there are early church fathers who know this doctrine.

You see, Protestants are being criticized that our doctrines are neither apostolic nor historical. Now, let's see if this doctrine conform to the standards of the Roman Catholic doctrine.

Please show me evidences from the early church fathers affirming the Bodily Assumption of Mary.


That is not how Catholic doctrine works. We must be careful in arguing with Protestants not to begin with the same erroneous assumptions that they use. There are important truths that remained implicit in Tradition and Scripture for many centuries before being taught explicitly by the Magisterium. So we don't need to prove that the early Church fathers explicitly taught every doctrine.

Lazarus 4th January 2011 02:27 AM

I'd been through a lot instances, and all of them proved to be futile in engaging discussions where the Blessed Mother is being attacked - no defense is enough - they are bent on attacking Catholic venerations of our mother in Heaven.

I have lot of my petitions answered through praying Holy Rosary, and whenever a problem is too burdensome, I resort to praying the rosary and I do get a lot of consolation and peace after praying the rosary. This is what I wish everyone to know - devotion to the Blessed Mother helps a lot!

myLivingBread 4th January 2011 03:45 AM

they said:
If that's the case, stop demanding from Protestants if our doctrines are aligned with the early church fathers. It is hypocrisy on your part.

Therefore, your doctrinal system is not a tripod (Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium). It's sola ecclessia or church alone. Why? For this doctrine alone, you won't be able to produce any evidences from the early church fathers or tradition for that matter. Your magisterium made it all up overtime.

Jeanne D'Arc 4th January 2011 12:37 PM

This is an argument that we cannot win in most instances. Case in point: there are several Protestant denominations that use the Nicene Creed in their worship services. They profess their belief in the phrase,"conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary....", and repeat it Sunday after Sunday and still they belabor their point. It makes no sense, but people throw sensibility out the window for age-old arguments. It is simply ignorance fostered by prejudicial thinking. You can't win, but you can pray.

Ron Conte 4th January 2011 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myLivingBread (Post 35550)
they said:
If that's the case, stop demanding from Protestants if our doctrines are aligned with the early church fathers. It is hypocrisy on your part.

Therefore, your doctrinal system is not a tripod (Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium). It's sola ecclessia or church alone. Why? For this doctrine alone, you won't be able to produce any evidences from the early church fathers or tradition for that matter. Your magisterium made it all up overtime.


We believe truths that are implicit in Tradition and Scripture. The Pope is the successor to Peter, and the other Bishops are the successors to the other Apostles. Whoever rejects the teaching of the Pope and the Bishops rejects the teaching of the Apostles chosen by Christ.

garabandalg 4th January 2011 05:22 PM

Our Blessed Mother needs no defense, yet our love for Her should drive us to always defend Her Name and Place in Heaven

She is The First Tabernacle which brought Christ to Us.

She is all about humility, and obedience, and is thus our perfect model as followers of Our Lord

It is folly to compare Peter to Mary in that, in my humble opinion, They each serve different roles in our Faith. The devil thrives in such foolishness to divide, confuse, and conquer us.

Devotion to Our Lady is a powerful tool in finding salvation. I do not think that we can accurately say that about St. Peter.

I have a final question: We reach so much of Paul's words, what about the idea that, in some ways, He is as important to our faith as Peter?

Brother 4th January 2011 08:34 PM

Those people don't live by Faith, but by reason alone, that is not the way to follow Christ, their attitude is not Christ-like.

Jesus did honor His mother Mary for He said:

{15:4} ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Whoever will have cursed father or mother shall die a death.’
{15:5} But you say: ‘If anyone will have said to father or mother, “It is dedicated, so that whatever is from me will benefit you,”
{15:6} then he shall not honor his father or his mother.’ So have you nullified the commandment of God, for the sake of your tradition.
{15:7} Hypocrites! How well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
{15:8} ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
{15:9} For in vain do they worship me, teaching the doctrines and commandments of men.’ ”

These people are seeking things to be revealed to them by flesh and blood but not from the Father Himself.

{16:17} And in response, Jesus said to him: “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, who is in heaven.

Jesus is alive today in His Church and modern day Pharisees are asking Him the same question they asked Him 2000 years ago, such as "Who revealed it to you?... "with what authority you say such things?", etc, etc....


They simply don't believe thise Words:

[John]
{14:17} the Spirit of Truth, whom the world is not able to accept, because it neither perceives him nor knows him. But you shall know him. For he will remain with you, and he will be in you.

{14:26} But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will suggest to you everything whatsoever that I have said to you.

Brother 6th January 2011 07:54 PM

The mere fact that the infallible New Testament books were selected by the Catholic Church's early fathers (Sacred Scripture that even Protestant denominations read and believe), confirms the infallible authority of the Church.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

"Scriptures for proof of the Church's infallible authority we appeal to them merely as reliable historical sources, and abstract altogether from their inspiration. Even considered as purely human documents they furnish us, we maintain, with a trustworthy report of Christ's sayings and promises; and, taking it to be a fact that Christ said what is attributed to Him in the Gospels, we further maintain that Christ's promises to the Apostles and their successors in the teaching office include the promise of such guidance and assistance as clearly implies infallibility. Having thus used the Scriptures as mere historical sources to prove that Christ endowed the Church with infallible teaching authority it is no vicious circle, but a perfectly legitimate logical procedure, to rely on the Church's authority for proof of what writings are inspired.

2
Merely remarking for the present that the texts in which Christ promised infallible guidance especially to Peter and his successors in the primacy might be appealed to here as possessing an a fortiori value, it will suffice to consider the classical texts usually employed in the general proof of the Church's infallibility; and of these the principal are:

•Matthew 28:18-20;
•Matthew 16:18;
•John 14, 15, and 16;
•I Timothy 3:14-15; and
•Acts 15:28 sq.
Matthew 28:18-20
In Matthew 28:18-20, we have Christ's solemn commission to the Apostles delivered shortly before His Ascension: "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." In Mark 16:15-16, the same commission is given more briefly with the added promise of salvation to believers and the threat of damnation for unbelievers; "Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned."

Now it cannot be denied by anyone who admits that Christ established a visible Church at all, and endowed it with any kind of effective teaching authority, that this commission, with all it implies, was given not only to the Apostles personally for their own lifetime, but to their successors to the end of time, "even to the consummation of the world". And assuming that it was the omniscient Son of God Who spoke these words, with a full and clear realization of the import which, in conjunction with His other promises, they were calculated to convey to the Apostles and to all simple and sincere believers to the end of time, the only reasonable interpretation to put upon them is that they contain the promise of infallible guidance in doctrinal teaching made to the Apostolic College in the first instance and then to the hierarchical college that was to succeed it.

In the first place it was not without reason that Christ prefaced His commission by appealing to the fullness of power He Himself had received: "All power is given to me", etc. This is evidently intended to emphasize the extraordinary character and extent of the authority He is communicating to His Church — an authority, it is implied, which He could not personally communicate were not He Himself omnipotent. Hence the promise that follows cannot reasonably be understood of ordinary natural providential guidance, but must refer to a very special supernatural assistance.

In the next place there is question particularly in this passage of doctrinal authority — of authority to teach the Gospel to all men — if Christ's promise to be with the Apostles and their successors to the end of time in carrying out this commission means that those whom they are to teach in His name and according to the plenitude of the power He has given them are bound to receive that teaching as if it were His own; in other words they are bound to accept it as infallible. Otherwise the perennial assistance promised would not really be efficacious for its purpose, and efficacious Divine assistance is what the expression used is clearly intended to signify. Supposing, as we do, that Christ actually delivered a definite body of revealed truth, to be taught to all men in all ages, and to be guarded from change or corruption by the living voice of His visible Church, it is idle to contend that this result could be accomplished effectively — in other words that His promise could be effectively fulfilled unless that living voice can speak infallibly to every generation on any question that may arise affecting the substance of Christ's teaching.

Without infallibility there could be no finality regarding any one of the great truths which have been identified historically with the very essence of Christianity; and it is only with those who believe in historical Christianity that the question need be discussed. Take, for instance, the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. If the early Church was not infallible in her definitions regarding these truths, what compelling reason can be alleged today against the right to revive the Sabellian, or the Arian, or the Macedonian, or the Apollinarian, or the Nestorian, or the Eutychian controversies, and to defend some interpretation of these mysteries which the Church has condemned as heretical? "

Quote:

One may not appeal to the inspired authority of the Scriptures, since for the fact of their inspiration the authority of the Church must be invoked, and unless she be infallible in deciding this one would be free to question the inspiration of any of the New Testament writings

----------------

For complete article see here.

Brother 6th January 2011 10:10 PM

Proof of papal infallibility from Holy Scripture
 
First infallible declaration given to Peter exclusively:

{16:13} Then Jesus went into parts of Caesarea Philippi. And he questioned his disciples, saying, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?”
{16:14} And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, and others say Elijah, still others say Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
{16:15} Jesus said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
{16:16} Simon Peter responded by saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
{16:17} And in response, Jesus said to him: “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, who is in heaven.


Quote:

Luke 22:31-32
Here Christ says to St. Peter and to his successors in the primacy: "Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren." This special prayer of Christ was for Peter alone in his capacity as head of the Church, as is clear from the text and context; and since we cannot doubt the efficacy of Christ's prayer, it followed that to St. Peter and his successors the office was personally committed of authoritatively confirming the brethren — other bishops, and believers generally — in the faith; and this implies infallibility.


myLivingBread 3rd June 2011 07:26 AM

These was asked by evangelicals :I know that there are at least eight (8) dogmas namely:

1. Mother of God
2. Immaculate Conception
3. Perpetual Virginity
4. Assumption
5. Mother of the Church
6. Co-Redemptrix
7. Co-Mediatrix
8. Queen of Heaven and Earth

So, my questions are the following:

1. Are these dogmas imposed by the Vatican will be a 'great threat' against the faith of the Catholic Church? Why or why not?

2. What will be the effects of the dogmas of Mary for the Catholic believers?

3. What will happen to the Christocentricity of the Roman Catholic Church?

4. Is the Roman Catholic Church facing a 'Marian Era'?

5. If there is such thing, what will be the next Marian dogma sounds like? Is the next dogma will be like 'Queen of queens' and 'Lady of ladies' or stuff?

6. Does Mariology affects Soteriology, to be general, the salvation of Christians?

Ron Conte 3rd June 2011 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myLivingBread (Post 37195)
1. Mother of God
2. Immaculate Conception
3. Perpetual Virginity
4. Assumption
5. Mother of the Church
6. Co-Redemptrix
7. Co-Mediatrix
8. Queen of Heaven and Earth


Mary's role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix is not a dogma. At best, it is the ordinary teaching of the Magisterium.

3. What will happen to the Christocentricity of the Roman Catholic Church?

6. Does Mariology affects Soteriology, to be general, the salvation of Christians?


Mary's role is always to immerse herself entirely in Christ, to worship Him, and to assist Him in all that He does for our salvation.

II. Partial List of Dogmas about the Virgin Mary

1. Her Immaculate Conception
(Papal Infallibility: 1854 - Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus)
2. Her Sinless Life: a gift from God distinct from her freedom from original sin
(Tradition and the Universal Magisterium)
3. Her Perpetual Virginity
(Tradition and the Universal Magisterium)
4. Mary as the Mother of God (Theotokos or God-bearer)
(Magisterium: A.D. 431 - Council of Ephesus; 681 - Third Council of Constantinople)
5. Mary as the Spouse of the Holy Spirit
6. Mary as the perfect disciple of Christ
7. Mary as the Mother and figure of the Church
(Scripture: John 19:26-27, and Tradition)
8. Her Participation in the Passion of Christ
(Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium)
9. Her Assumption to Heaven
(Papal Infallibility: 1950 - Pope Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus)
10. Her Queenship in Heaven
(Tradition: as explained in Ad Caeli Reginam)

III. Partial List of Truths about the Virgin Mary not yet Defined as Dogma

1. Her miraculous virgin conception and miraculous virgin birth
2. Her triune role co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix
3. Her Death and Resurrection (i.e. her Dormition)
4. Her Return at the Second Coming of Christ

http://www.catholicplanet.com/mariology.htm

Brother 3rd June 2011 02:36 PM

Some of these dogmas are implicitly stated in Sacred Scripture:

1. Mother of God

Jesus is God and Mary is His mother.

5. Mother of the Church

It is clearly stated in Sacred Scripture that Christ is the Head of His Church (Colossians 1:18 "And he is the head of his body, the Church") , that we are part of His Mystical Body (1 Cor 12:19 ff), and God chose to have a Mother (Luke 1:30-13); therefore, Mary is our mother as well. Mary can not be the Mother of a "head" or of one part of a body only.

8. Queen of Heaven and Earth

Jesus is the King of kings (Rev 17:14), and every knee shall bow at His Name, in Heaven, Earth and in Hell (Philippians 2:10) and since this same King has a Mother (because He willed so), that Mother must be a Queen. "The mother of a king is a queen".


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.