“we have example of Jesus talking to Elijah and Moses in the Transfiguration. “
They were there together.
“It often takes a form of soliciting his prayer; as a righteous person his prayer “accomplishes much” (James 5:16).”
I agree entirely with this passage. It doesn’t say, however,
that departed Christians can hear us when we talk to them.
“They are described as a “cloud of witnesses” in Heb. 12:1”
These witnesses were specified by name in Hebrews 11. They
were not physically watching.
“and in several places in Revelation angels bring their prayers to God.”
Yes, but I’m going to set aside Revelation for now. If I
open that book, we will never get past it.
“I don’t know how anyone can state that categorically when she is specifically described as mother of Christ, and it is her seed that will crucsh Satan according to Genesis 3:15.”
Mary is the source of that seed, certainly. Her Seed,
Christ, will crush Satan’s head. Not Mary.
“If we are to take scripture seriouslty, we should not dismiss scripture so easily when it does not suit the Protestant tradition.”
I do not care one whit (is that how you spell whit?)
about Protestant tradition. I only care whether something
is true. I would extend that statement to include all
traditions of any denomination
“your interpretation would insert an economic arrangement for the aging mother in the middle of the sublime moment when we all receive redemption. Note the language, too: the Disciple took her “eis ta idia”, “with his own”, that is with other disciples.”
I don’t interpret this passage. I observe what it actually
says. Christ speaks to his disciple. Christ speaks to his
Mother. It is no “economic arrangement”. The disciple took
her as his mother. Mary took the disciple as his son. The
disciples “own” is his family. Not the other disciples. I only
wrote earlier that Christ did not give her to all Christians
as their mother, as you wrote.
“It says, most accurately, that thoughts of many will be revealed by Mary to her Son”
I don’t think that is close to what is said in that verse.
“Thank you for the questions, and for your thoughful attitude.”
Thank you for your insight, and for your thoughful attitude!
Blessings to you,
ampu
It remains the fact that the scripture has numerous instances pointing to the communion of saints. Sometime, like in Transfiguration, they take a form of a visible conversation, sometime, they are called witnesses in a way that suggests supernatural contact rather than physical observation, sometime, they are named and sometime they are not named but only their prayers are mentioned as being delivered. Sometime, the intercession takes place during the life of the saint and sometime after his or her passing on to eternal life. I don’t see how the diversity of methods of how the communion of saints takes place points away from its existence any more than the diversity of ways we communicate in this life points away from the existence of physical communication.
It is possible to interpret any scripture in a number of ways. Certainly, the phrase about Mary “reveling thoughts” can be interpreted, perhaps, differently. My job here is to present the interpretation consistent with Catholic Mariology. Regarding the mutual adoption of Mary and John, surely there is nothing in the scripture to substantiate the hypothesis that it was exclusive to John. but I can easily substantiate my position: Mary appears with all the disciples in Acts 1, and fights on behalf of all of them in Rev. 12.