Posted on 12/22/2013 1:46:25 PM PST by piusv
Not everyone can be a woman, but my wife Ann manages. Me, you can call Alex. Happy feast of the Nativity of Our Lord!
Oops - I always read your name as ANNAlex - figuring ‘lex’ was something I didn’t know. Regardless - great posts, and Merry Christmas
In that reading “lex” would be Latin for “law”.
dammit - 4 years of Latin, 2 years of which i actually paid attention to because of the fantabulous Ms. Ross, and i still blew it....
What they would characterize as "deifying" Mary is in fact simply Catholics' ackowledgement of the special graces and attributes she received from God. She was conceived without sin and without the stain of sin. As the Theotokos, she was free of concupiscence and was therefore free of sinfulness of any kind (including sinful thoughts). For the Pope to imply otherwise is troubling. If the only way to present Catholicism in a fashion palatable to those outside the Church is to minimize Catholic beliefs in the public arena, then ecumenism is simply a code word for relativism.
The end cannot justify the means.
Hence, it is the clear and unanimous opinion of the Fathers that the most glorious Virgin, for whom "he who is mighty has done great things," was resplendent with such an abundance of heavenly gifts, with such a fullness of grace and with such innocence, that she is an unspeakable miracle of God -- indeed, the crown of all miracles and truly the Mother of God; that she approaches as near to God himself as is possible for a created being; and that she is above all men and angels in glory. Hence, to demonstrate the original innocence and sanctity of the Mother of God, not only did they frequently compare her to Eve while yet a virgin, while yet innocence, while yet incorrupt, while not yet deceived by the deadly snares of the most treacherous serpent; but they have also exalted her above Eve with a wonderful variety of expressions. Eve listened to the serpent with lamentable consequences; she fell from original innocence and became his slave. The most Blessed Virgin, on the contrary, ever increased her original gift, and not only never lent an ear to the serpent, but by divinely given power she utterly destroyed the force and dominion of the evil one.
-Ineffabilus Deus, Pius IX, 1854
I suspect if Francis spoke like Pius IX did here he wouldn't get too many Protestants to agree with him.
Mary even consider God a liar? A resounding NO.
I heard some say that my Son was a thief; others that he was an impostor; others, that no one deserved death more than he did; and every word was a new sword of grief to my heart."
Pope Francis' blasphemy of the Blessed Mother is just another sword to Her heart.
But the Pope did not imply that Mary experienced concupiscence. He only said that under the circumstance it would have been natural to her to doubt the Divine Plan.
There was no “blasphemy”.
I really don’t know what more needs to said here. Mary would NOT have doubted. It would NOT have been natural for MARY to do so.
This comment was imprudent AT BEST. Why do you think the official newspaper of the Vatican leaves this part of the homily out of their article?
http://www.osservatoreromano.va/en/news/mystery-doesnt-seek-publicity#.Ur3w4yyA2yc
Even they know its rife with problems.
You are dealing with the supernaturally granted freedom from concupiscence, so you cannot say "it would not have been natural". She simply did not doubt because of her immaculate condition. The natural reaction would have been to doubt; that is what the pope said.
Remember also that Mary was free from concupiscence, that is corrupt appetites; but she still had natural appetites such as she wished to be worm when cold, wished to eat when hungry, etc. To doubt her prior understanding of the Plan is in this, natural category. As an intelligent woman she was certainly likely to re-assess, for example, the literal understanding of Christ's kingship, that she might had had. Such re-assessment is again natural intellectual ability and not concupiscence. At most you can say that the Pope over-dramatized this point somewhat awkwardly, -- or the translator did.
As to why Osservatore Romano omitted this passage, I don't know. The passage is indeed "daring", in-obvious, difficult to translate, -- all that. It is, however not blasphemous.
You’re comparing having desire to doubt what the Lord told her with desires to eat and be warm? Really? How many ways can we twist this pretzel.
Clearly, there is nothing I can say to make you see how bad Francis’ “hypothetical” is.
Considering the uproar it has created among Catholics, I’m sure Francis will “clarify”.....not.
Both the desire to eat and be warm, and the desire to re-examine assumptions are natural appetites in a man and not concupiscence. Indeed, if you don’t comprehend this fact, you cannot comprehend His Holiness’ homily.
Yes, obviously you comprehend it better than I. Gotcha.
Aha.
Why is it that you think you are just so knowledgeable about what Francis meant? Why is it that you are so sure I am wrong and you are right?
Let me ask you this: have you ever found anything that Francis said as unorthodox? Or do you defend everything he says? Because I am getting the distinct impression from you that Francis could say Jesus wasn’t God and you’d defend him somehow. I actually get that impression from a number of Catholics on this forum.
I may tend to lean towards criticism of Francis, but I have made comments before in defense of him when I thought they were unfair (for example, when people say he said atheists are saved vs redeemed).
This is YOUR interpretation.
Armed with this knowledge I reached a deeper understanding of the homily than I did before.
have you ever found anything that Francis said as unorthodox?
Not so far. I am however, troubled by his appointment of Wuerl to replace Burke, but that is, of course, purely administrative matter. At the same time I admire the spirit of charity that is so evident in His Holiness and I wish his pontificate long years.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mary belonged completely to the Lord
5. The special privilege granted by God to her who is "all holy" leads us to admire the marvels accomplished by grace in her life. It also reminds us that Mary belonged always and completely to the Lord, and that no imperfection harmed her perfect harmony with God.
Pope John Paul II
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm24.htm
How could Mary be in "perfect harmony with God", yet at the same time doubt Him?
So, because you read up on concupiscence in these last few days you are now an expert on what Francis meant in his homily (and anyone who disagrees with you is woefully ignorant)? Seriously?
Besides, you are still assuming he was offering a hypothetical, as in “if Mary was just like us, it would have been natural for her to....”. I completely disagree with that interpretation. If that were the case, he would have prefaced what he said by, “If Mary was like us perhaps she would have said “Lies!, .....etc”.
No, his comments lead the reader to believe that Mary might have thought these things, that Mary might have desired to call God a liar, etc. There are way too many Catholics educated in/knowledgeable of Catholic theology that are at least very upset by his statements for you to poo-poo them as “just not understanding”. It’s insulting to say the least. Just stop.
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.