Posted on 10/06/2010 7:56:37 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
Overall, Catholics liked the movie "The Nativity" but had several problems with it. For one thing they changed Scripture during the closing of the movie. On the screen they flashed the Bible passage from Luke 1:46-54. But they left out the words "for me" from middle of the sentence "The Lord has done great things for me, and Holy is his name." I don't think they should have taken that out of the Word of God, without using any elypses to show they skipped it. Another issue with the movie is they showed Mary screaming and pushing in pain as she gave birth to Jesus.
The Early Church Fathers are almost unanimous in the assertion that the birth was painless and had no loss of Mary's virginal integrity during the birth. In other words, her Hymen didn't break. St. Augustine said "Jesus passed through the womb of Mary as a ray of sun passes through glass." Pope Martin in 649 AD defined the doctrine that Mary:
If you need pray for Doc visit just say so otherwise have a beautiful blessed day. Bye
Once again, the doctrines on Mary were defined many years after the writing of the NT because of challenges to what the Church as a whole already believed. Most of those challenges came about because of heresies regarding Jesus and who He is.
These things were not an issue at the time of the writing of the Gospels. Much as the doctrine of the Trinity were not an issue and therefore though there is support for it in the NT, it is nowhere explicitly stated.
We disagree that these doctrines contradict what is written in the New Testament.
Why would God take away Mary’s sin at the time of conception and not others? I understand why this would be a puzzler for you and seem to contradict Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the Cross. Yet to me there is no contradiction. For although Christ’s death redeemed us and overcame the penalty of death and opened the door of heaven to us it is still the Grace of God that saves us. And grace is an unmerited gift which God dispenses according to His will not ours. In fact the declaration of the Doctrine of The Immaculate Conception states
“...by a singular privilege and grace of the omnipotent God, in consideration of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind, ...”
It is also easier to understand the teaching if you have an appreciation of Mary being seen as the New Eve and as the new ark of the covenant bearing the living Word. It was not fitting that the living Word be carried in an unclean, corrupt woman.
Also their is Scriptural support for the dogma (and you certainly are free not to interpert it so) the Greek term for “full of grace” is Kecharitomene. As explained in an article about the Immaculate Conception
“The expression (Greek kecharitomene) in the angel’s salutation, represents a proper name, and must on this account express a characteristic quality of Mary. The principal reason why the pleasure of God rests in special fashion on her is her election to the dignity of the Mother of God (Theotokos). Accordingly, Mary’s endowment with grace proceeding from God’s pleasure must also be of unique perfect. However, it is perfect only if it be perfect not only intensively but also extensively, that is, if it extends over her whole life, beginning with her entry into the world.”
A further discussion on the term can be found at
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a116.htm
“” ‘Highly favoured’ (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians 1:6 . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] “is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’ “ (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14)”
“However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (or bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p. 166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Harvard Univ Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p. 175).”
So there is Scriptural basis for the teaching. But I understand your objections and certainly don’t see it as something it is essential for Non Catholics to believe. Though I assume most believe Mary was without personal sin even if they believe she to was born with original sin.
It was mainly discussed by the Church fathers because Jewish and Pagan authorities tried to discredit Christ by discrediting the Virgin Birth. Some even suggested the scandal that Jesus was Mary’s bastard child.
Oops, I did not see this before I posted my reply.
I don't really understand how it works out in heaven. As I understand it, heaven is a state of being beyond time and space. If you are in a timless state, how does before-and-after work? How does cause-and-effect work?
Can you change your mind?
I don't know!
Neither do I. I just have my beliefs, and others have theirs.
Actually the same phrase is used of Jesus and Stephen.
This is all made up. It is theological mumbo jumbo to support a theological position. It does not come from Scripture. I will deal with this in more depth later, but it just isn’t true.
So, was it Kecharitomene or Panagia? As a form of address? And where: I’m interested in looking it up.
Oh, OK! All the native Greek speakers had it wrong until-— when?
It was NOT a name.
I'm not a Catholic, but I believe Jesus was born by the same method God used to leave the burial clothes and the solid rock tomb without rolling away the stone, the same technique of moving from where/when to where/when and back again that he used to appear in the locked and shuttered upper room, and the same method He used to write on Belshazzar's palace party central wall while standing in a different where/when than Belshazzar's realm.
Call it what you will, but there are clues all over the Bible pointing to the ability to move between where/whens which God created and His Holy Spirit maintains.
What is more incredible than that feat is that Mary agreed to be the Mother of Jesus without knowing she would not go through the pains of childbirth at the time she agreed! Truly, The Blessed Virgin was the handmaiden of the Lord. She did the greatest job of baby sitting ever in the History of the world! And we are the more blessed for it.
Okay, now I read it. It’s comforting to know I agree with the Church fathers. Of course, we used the same source materials so ... it’s all good. Yeah!
“Mary’s response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man.” Wrong! She was betrothed to Joseph! In the Jewish system they were betrothed awaiting a final marriage ceremony. There is nothig to indicate that Joseph had become betrothed to Mary/Mary betrothed to Joseph with the understanding that she would never consumate the marriage. In fact, the acceptance by JOseph of the child Mary carried would not have been an issue if Joseph had no intention of having Mary as his wife in all things pertaining to marriage. As to ‘brothers and sisters’, the word of witnesses indicates that folks back then were having a hard time believing Jesus was divine because they knew His borthers and sisters! Albeit they were younger siblings but siblings nevertheless.
Coul it be that the instant that God placed Jesus in Her womb, she was instantly sinless. I mean if one understands the gestational process, the child is making their own body of organs and tissues, but shedding cells into the amniotic fluid and these taken away via the umbilicus via adsorption. Mary would have been ‘under the blood of the Savior’ while Jesus was gestating in her womb.
And one more thing: every child that a woman gestates leaves behnd in her uterine tissue cells that remain alive for the rest of her life. This is a strange discovery made by embryologists. If anyone wants to have more on this, I could find the source, I used it when writing the little booklet ‘America, We Need To Talk’ regarding stem cells and cloning, etc.
John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.
Where are the brothers! Jesus is 33 years old when he dies. Mary is at least in her 40's or 50's. If she had other kids they were full adults to take care of their mother. But Jesus puts her in the care of John the apostle. Does not make sense compared to the Jewish requirements of 4th commandment to help your Mother.
Pregnant Women "Inherit" Some Characteristics of Their Children
8-Sep-2000 -- ZENIT.org News Agency [19] MILAN, SEP 5 (ZENIT.org).
...
Professor Salvatore Mancuso, head of the gynecology institute, said: "We have proofs that beginning in the fifth week of gestation, in other words, when a woman realizes she is pregnant, an infinite number of messages pass from the embryo to the mother, through chemical substances like hormones, neurotransmitters, etc. Such information serves to adapt the mother's organism to the presence of the new being.
...
Mancuso continued: "From the fifth week there is clearly a passing of cells, but messages begin at conception. Even during the first phase of cellular subdivision, when the embryo is moving in the fallopian tubes, there are transmissions through contact with tissues touched by the moving embryo.
...
When asked how long the fetus' influence on the mother lasts, the professor answered: "Stem cells have been found in the mother even 30 years after the birth. It could be said, therefore, the pregnancy does not last the 40 canonical weeks, but the woman's entire life. … "This should be cause for reflection also in regard to the hypothesis of 'renting' a womb: In this case, the mother who carries the embryo accepts a being whose genetic patrimony is 100% foreign, and who will 'modify' her for the rest of her life. We have no idea of the long-term consequences of such operations.
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.