Posted on 09/06/2007 3:27:02 PM PDT by annalex
I can read in Greek and can consult patristic sources who likewise read the Gospel in orginal. No one prior to the Reformation suggested that the episodes in Luke 8 and Luke 11 in any way discourages marian devotions. In fact, I was at an Orthodox service yesterday to celebrate the nativity of Mary, and we happily chanted that very passage in veneration of the Theotokos.
Case closed. He just said you can't make the case from the bible.
He's right. You can't. It isn't in there anyplace, ever, at any time, in no way, not in any manner...etc.....etc.....
Yeah. Me too.
That perhaps was his original thinking, but he ended up understanding and accepting the marian dogmas, and he explains why quite well.
Christ was divine; Mary wasn’t.
But that wasn’t the author’s statement. He didn’t appeal to Christ’s divinity, he appealed to Christ’s sinless perfect humanity.
Then we are agreed.
The case cannot be made biblically.
He agrees. I agree. You agree.
It’s a kumbaya moment!
He got Mary's flesh [...] If He's gonna be perfect humanity, He'd better have perfect human flesh untainted by sin. To me the Immaculate Conception, seen in that light, made sense.So, where does he go wrong? A miracle is required to produce Perfect Human Jesus. Flesh of Mary is used, but it did not have to be used. It is a natural reasoning to conclude that her flesh was likewise incorrupt -- not only do we get the Immaculate Conception form it, but also the Assumption.
Conversely, no miracle is required to produce Mary (well, there was a miracle of overcoming infertility and old age of the parents, but not an ontological miracle to produce a god-man). Her immaculacy comes not from her parents, but from Jesus himself, and the logical dominoes do not fall.
The case can be made from the Scripture, but it requires use of reason.
>>
Conversely, no miracle is required to produce Mary (well, there was a miracle of overcoming infertility and old age of the parents, but not an ontological miracle to produce a god-man). Her immaculacy comes not from her parents, but from Jesus himself, and the logical dominoes do not fall.
<<
So you’re saying that Jesus made Mary perfect at some point in her life after being born from imperfect parents so that He could be perfect? Why loop back to Mary then?
Why not have Jesus be perfect made from imperfect flesh just as you claim Mary was?
Are you sure you’re willing to sacrifice kumbaya on this one? :>)
Salvation is of the Lord, the bible is about the Lord and to say that RC's know the Lord better than I do because of secret knowledge about Mary is unscriptural. Now I know that term doesn't really strike home as I'd like. But it would be wrong of me to try and call it something else since that is the most severe charge there is when it comes to doctrine.
Uh, okay. Yesterday I visited a friend for bible study.
that one and only human actor in this was Mary herself
So Joseph had no 'role' in this 'play' (i.e. to serve as human protector of Mary and as Jesus 'adoptive' human father)?
therefore it is clearly logical that she'd be pure from all corruption
I agree that Mary was saved.
More precicely, at the time of her conception; this is why it is Immaculate Conception. Yes, that is what the Church teaches.
Why not have Jesus be perfect made from imperfect flesh?
Or make Him not from flesh at all? This is precisely the puzzlement that led Kresta to Mary: that for some reason it pleased God to be born of flesh. Now the question becomes, in light of the verses such as
Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. (Luke 1:42)and
there is no good tree that bringeth forth evil fruit; nor an evil tree that bringeth forth good fruit. For every tree is known by its fruit. (Luke 6:43f)-- what kind of flesh?
The Eucharist taken in a state of grace (compare 1 Cor 11:27) is necessary and sufficient for salvation. This is why it is given to the dying.
I am. These Catholic writings are called the New Testament.
We are talking genetic material of Jesus here. I saw it the other day.
Joseph is the adoptive father, patron saint of things that pertain to the family and chastity, and of caprenters.
Incorruption is different from justification; it is a gift given saints, and uniquely to Mary in her Assumption into heaven.
So where is it again that the bible says to "venerate" Mary? Is all of that read into "blessed rather"?
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.