Replies

FK, Mary was destined to be the Mother of our Lord and nothing else, for anything else that she would be remembered for would diminish not only her special place in God's Plan but our Lord as well. It takes an active stretch of one's imagination to think that she was used as a temporary dish to carry God Incarnate only to be used later for unholy things.

How could it diminish Mary's legacy if not only was she the mother of Christ (with two natures), but also the mother of such great spiritual men as James and Jude? Granted, there's no point in trying to follow the first act in terms of bettering it, but that doesn't mean there wasn't a second act, etc., which was completely independent of the first, and not remotely comparable.

You say above that if Mary was to be remembered for anything besides being His mother that it would diminish God. Should we not remember Mary for her faith? I know for certain that you do, and I do too.

When you above refer to "unholy things", I can only assume you mean the proposition that Joseph "USED" her as a sex object and baby-making factory. I cry out "Where's the love"? :) Poor Joseph is made the fiend here. Should he have not relied on the word of the angel when he said: "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit."? (Matt. 1:20) This was directly from an angel. How was Joseph supposed to decipher a secret meaning? There was no Apostolic Tradition to translate the words for him.

Please don't tell me that in the Greek, that taking a girl home as your wife really meant only for tea and platonic conversation. Within the culture, the concept of Joseph "TAKING" Mary home as his wife has to be significant. But, I'll just let any Greek (or Serb :) speak for himself as to what happens when he takes a woman home as his wife. :)

How could it diminish Mary's legacy if not only was she the mother of Christ (with two natures), but also the mother of such great spiritual men as James and Jude?

Scripture, please. There is no reason to believe that Mary gave birth to James or Jude. Read the letter of Jude. Don't you think it is strange that Jude calls James his brother but NOT Jesus? IF Jesus was Jude's brother through Mary, Jude would CERTAINLY call himself Jesus' brother, not James. Again, further proof of cousin.

Regards Regards

FK, I don't think we speak the same language; words don't mean the same thing. I am sure you don't mean to, but when you respond it seems to me that you twist what I said.

Should we not remember Mary for her faith?

She was meant to be remembered as the one who gave birth to our Incarnated Lord and Savior, to be the bearer of God, Christ, our Lord and God. It is an awesome task that she was given. Being faithful is not all of it.

When you above refer to "unholy things" I can only assume you mean the proposition that Joseph "USED" her as a sex object and baby-making factory

Yes you do assume a lot. If she had other children, most of them were "unholy," and even if James and Jude were saints, are they on the par of our Lord? Your sense of "holiness" beffudels me.