Posted on 04/01/2008 4:23:02 PM PDT by NYer
Just doing my part to object to Traditions of Men.
Fifty Carat Circle?
And IHS can produce a "strong me" in the most unexpected ways.
God frequently chooses broken vessels.
Amen.
Looks like Quix finally has met his demise. Thank Admin Moderator, and pray for both of them.
I can second that. It was one of my well-read mother's favorites, in book and movie. And through her, became one of mine. Not surprisingly, she had 'The Incorruptibles' as well.
Lastly, Pope Benedict has been welcoming of the renewal of the Latin mass; if you can find a service in your area, it is a profoundly moving and contemplative rite.
Harder to find in my area and not well received/spoken of by some in charge.
Mary uniquely participated in the Redemption of humanity with her Son Jesus Christ, although in a completely subordinate and dependent manner to that of her Son.
Works for me.
As I like to say, Mary said, "Yes," to God. So God planted His Love deep within her beneath her heart. And His Love grew in her, and she brought His Love into the world. Isn't this what we all want for ourselves? Don't we want the grace to give God our whole-hearted Yes? Don't we want Love to be planted and to grow in us? Don't we want to share God's Love with the world? I do.
To describe giving birth as "dispensing", well, it's not the first word that leaps to my mind. But Jesus is the embodied sum of the Grace of God. All God's Grace is in Jesus. And Jesus was in Mary. And she bore Him to us.
Q.E.D.
Then to, you'll pardon the expression, flesh it out, if the touch of the hem of our Lord's garment could heal the women with the issue of blood, then what can we hope for from the touch of His lips at her breast, His hand on her face, His stroking her hair, as babies do.
We parents come about as close as I can imagine to blessedness when we see our child smiling and running to us full of greeting and love because we came home. What blessings must Mary have received when she returned to the crib where she laid her child?
It seems to me that even were we to deny her perpetual virginity, her immaculate conception, and her assumption, we would still hold her the most blessed not only of women but of all humanity, save one.
How intimate is the relationship between parent and infant! How joyously grave the responsibility of that brief period when the parent is the joy of the child, and his comfort and the embodiment of all that is good for the child! With what happy bereavement do we give up that time of unspeakable closeness for the distance which growth and freedom require!
Our hearts quicken at our children's anxieties. Their small pains cut more deeply than our gnawing sorrows. Their triumphs and joys lift us higher than any other thing can do.
And all this heart-touching-heart compassion our Lady shared with our Lord. How can she be less than more glorious than the mighty cherubim, higher than the burning seraphim, the brightest created light in all the heavens?
I love her.
I intended to say strong men...but it sorta works that way too.
It is right and good that you should love her.
For Love loved her first and all that He loves should be the object of our love as well.
And she was the first on earth to love Love—therein the circle of love is completed—an example for all of us to come.
God bless you for this post.
No, she is not in the slightest. Mary is not involved in anyone's salvation other than her own. Period. That error extends the necessary requirement for Christ's human birth into blasphemous hyperbole.
Mary cooperated with God in the redemption of the world and is therefore "Co-Redemptrix" of the human race.
Could Mary have said "no" to God? I very much doubt it. Mary co-redeems no one. To believe so is anti-Scriptural.
No Mary, No Jesus
No Mary, then someone else equally pure of heart to be the mother of the baby Jesus. To even imagine Mary's "cooperation" was required for Christ to be born is ludicrous. God is not beholden to His creation, as much as the RCC would like Him to be.
I am sorry you feel that way. Quix has been a very outspoken, yet knowledgable poster for a long time. I don’t know what was said that was “so bad” that he was banned. (It was deleted).
What I do feel bad about is the obvious ‘glee’ over the moderators choice to suspend a FReeper.
I don't think I've ever seen Quix get up anybody in a nasty way.Not ever.
This sucks.
Oh good grief.
Yes, it does. But, for posters to find pleasure in the loss of a long time FReeper, and friend of many, also disturbs me seriously.
You understand he can post whenever he wants, right?
When a person is suspended or banned - it is my understanding that they cannot post.
And this intimacy would appear where in Scripture? Because a careful reading of Scripture clearly tells us that Christ considers all believers as close to Him as His own mother and brothers.
Indeed it adds a depth and richness to the story of salvation on which so many miss out.
The "story" of salvation does not need any added depth or richness beyond what Christ accomplished on the cross -- alone.
The RCC seems oblivious to the nearly incestuous shellac with which they tarnish the relationship between Christ and Mary. It is not only unScriptural and blasphemous, it's thoroughly unseemly.
He’s not suspended or banned.
And thus you mock God and His mother.
Settle down,maybe I haven't seen enough of his posts,or maybe some people are offended way too easily.
Wether you think Quix is right or wrong,he/she seems serious about Jesus and I doubt he's thick enough to think outright nastiness gells with his faith.
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.