Posted on 05/03/2004 8:48:00 AM PDT by NYer
Perhaps. But Jesus was known treat his mother this way.
While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. Then one said to Him, "Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You." But He answered and said to the one who told Him, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, "Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother." (Matt. 12:46-50)According to your logic He should have been more accommodating and made His mother feel more welcome. Should Mary have felt slighted by her Son's treatment?
Problem is the text of Revelation does not support your conclusion.
5 And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne. 6 Then the woman fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she would be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.Note the progression of events; birth of the child, ascension to God, fleeing to the wilderness.
Unlike the story of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph going to Egypt, the only character mentioned in Rev. 12 in the wilderness is the woman. Rev. 12 actually matches the warning of Jesus to his church in places like Luke 21 that when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies they were to "flee to the mountains".
You RCs have to learn that you can't have it both ways. Either argue from the Bible or trust in church dogma, but don't try to mix the two cuz you'll get bit when they don't match. And then you are forced by your dogma to rely on your dogma alone.
Obviously, that is not our belief. You can hardly expect us to be consistent with beliefs of yours which we reject.
Third, Mary didn't need to be born in a state of gace, she simply needed to be "sanctified" at the moment of conception. That is what the angel declared.
No, the angel called Mary "kecharitomene" -- already completely graced. I believe the verb form refers to an action completed in the past.
Where in the Bible does Jesus ascend to God as a child?
Oh, wait, you mean this is prophecy and things like temporal sequences aren't always to be taken hyper-literally?
Obviously, that is not our belief. You can hardly expect us to be consistent with beliefs of yours which we reject.
Huh?? That is precisely the RC position.
The justification of which St. Paul here speaks is the infusion of sanctifying grace which alone renders a person supernaturally pleasing in the sight of God. But justification, that is, an infusion of sanctifying grace, cannot be merited by us; it is an entirely gratuitous gift of God. (from the Douay Bible commentary on Romans 3 and 4)
And from the Catholic Encyclopedia on Justification:
The two elements of active justification, forgiveness of sin and sanctification, furnish at the same time the elements of habitual justification, freedom from sin and holiness. According to the Catholic doctrine, however, this freedom from sin and this sanctity are effected, not by two distinct and successive Divine acts, but by a single act of God. For, just as light dispels darkness, so the infusion of sanctifying grace eo ipso dispels from the soul original and mortal sin. (Cf. Trent, sess. VI, can. xi: "Si quis dixerit, homines justificari vel sola imputatione justitiae Christi, vel sola peccatorum remissione, exclusa gratia et caritate, quae in cordibus eorum per Spiritum Sanctum diffundatur atque illis inhaereat. . ., a.s.")Someone needs a refresher course.While in Baptism infants are forthwith cleansed of the stain of original sin without any preparation on their part, the adult must pass through a moral preparation, which consists essentially in turning from sin and towards God.
Now that a real YAWNer!
Did you miss this part? "Cleansing of the stain of original sin" and "infusion of grace" are two ways of saying the same thing.
The Council of Trent continues:
CANON VI.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify; or, that they do not confer that grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto; as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice received through faith, and certain marks of the Christian profession, whereby believers are distinguished amongst men from unbelievers; let him be anathema.
Someone needs a refresher course.
You do, in humility.
The Greek word used in Rev. 12, teknon, is translated "child" not "infant". There is no connotation of age in that Greek word. It's a generational word. We are called "children of God" regardless of our age. See Act 13:33, "Thou art My Son (teknon); today I have begotten Thee."
There are other Greek words, nepios and paidion, used to convey the age of the child cf. Matt. 2:8; Luke 10:21; 1 Cor. 13:11, Heb. 5:13. These Greek words are not used in Rev. 12.
tc54> "Second, baptism does not infuse grace into an infant."
me> Obviously, that [i.e., the idea that baptism does not infuse grace into an infant] is not our belief. You can hardly expect us to be consistent with beliefs of yours which we reject.
Read a little more carefully next time.
Im not sure what you mean by our Lord Jesus sharing our genes. Christs virgin birth needed to take place so that He would NOT be tainted with the sins of men which is passed on through the sons of Adam. With all due respect, women in the Bible are looked upon as carrying the children in the womb but there is no ownership. Since Im not a reproductive historian nor do I play one on TV I dont know where your emphasis on Mary carrying the Son of God comes from except the Catholic Church.
And I believe the Nicene Creed says Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit. Not conceived of a woman.
Before you reply, this is a dumb statement on my part. Of course there was ownership.
Pure scatology. You should change your screen name to bibleignoramus, Einstein.
"And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus." Luke 1:30-31
Yep.
Minor correction: the veneration of the Theotokos was 100% until the wreckers (off the Protestsnt Reformation) decided to throw out the baby, bathwater and the tub.)
And you can keep posting the same until Judgement.
And you will get, guess what?
Bible verses.
More scatology. Linguistic literalists like yourself have never learned not to apply contemporary semantics to ancient texts. Here's some free advice: The first step in getting out of a hole is to quit digging.
"And it came to pass that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost. And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" Luke 1:41-43
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.