Posted on 12/22/2013 1:46:25 PM PST by piusv
And no, we don't need to agree for you to provide quotes from popes and saints that look even close to what Francis is asserting. The fact of the matter is that you just can't find such quotes. This man does not speak like other popes.
In your desperate need to defend his words, you continue in your blindness. I predict that at some point you will have to confront that because I am that sure that this guy is going to say much worse in the future. Mark my words.
Not just now, from post one your understanding of the homily was fantastical compared to the text available. This is why showing you patristic examples that are "even close" is not possible.
It is, of course, possible that Pope Francis will do or say something I will disagree with; I have disagreed with all the popes since Vatican II on one thing or another. However attacks from the right on Pope Francis today are a product of hysteria; it is a reaction to his distinctive style rather than the substance. This is why he says one thing and you imagine another.
As to the homily as actually said, here is St. Augustine
by this [Luke 2:35] is signified that Mary also, through whom was performed the mystery of the incarnation, looked with doubt and astonishment at the death of her Lord, seeing the Son of God so humbled as to come down even to death
Uh, the point was that you called our understanding as fantasy (and now we can add words like hysteria and imagine). Again proving that only YOU have the correct understanding (despite the fact that there are numerous folks that have concerns about Francis and his most recent comments).
This is not about his “distinctive” style (lol @ distinctive). Time will prove this out.
And with that I’m done playing this game you seem to be playing.
Mary's perfect sanctity
Some few patristic writers expressed their doubts as to the presence of minor moral defects in Our Blessed Lady. [77] St. Basil, e.g., suggests that Mary yielded to doubt on hearing the words of holy Simeon and on witnessing the crucifixion. [78] St. John Chrysostom is of opinion that Mary would have felt fear and trouble, unless the angel had explained the mystery of the Incarnation to her, and that she showed some vainglory at the marriage feast in Cana and on visiting her Son during His public life together with the brothers of the Lord. [79] St. Cyril of Alexandria [80] speaks of Mary's doubt and discouragement at the foot of the cross. But these Greek writers cannot be said to express an Apostolic tradition, when they express their private and singular opinions.
Scripture and tradition agree in ascribing to Mary the greatest personal sanctity; She is conceived without the stain of original sin; she shows the greatest humility and patience in her daily life (Luke 1:38, 48); she exhibits an heroic patience under the most trying circumstances (Luke 2:7, 35, 48; John 19:25-27). When there is question of sin, Mary must always be excepted. [81] Mary's complete exemption from actual sin is confirmed by the Council of Trent (Session VI, Canon 23): "If any one say that man once justified can during his whole life avoid all sins, even venial ones, as the Church holds that the Blessed Virgin did by special privilege of God, let him be anathema." Theologians assert that Mary was impeccable, not by the essential perfection of her nature, but by a special Divine privilege. Moreover, the Fathers, at least since the fifth century, almost unanimously maintain that the Blessed Virgin never experienced the motions of concupiscence.
From the fact that you three have incorrect understanding does not follow that only I have the correct one; different understandings are possible, but yours is not among them.
There is nothing in the homily that contradicts the major tenet of our faith that Mary has “the greatest personal sanctity” and that “She is conceived without the stain of original sin”.
The homily, which I am sure you read, merely says that at the Cross she possibly could have doubted Christ’s mission even in strongest terms, yet she remained silent as “she was overshadowed with the silence of the mystery that she did not understand, and with this silence, she has accepted that this mystery can grow and flourish in the hope”.
That possibility of doubt in no way makes her sinful as doubt is a natural gift of human intellect, which she possessed.
But I repeat myself and probably am inviting more hysteria.
Thanks, piusv.
From Fr. John Hardon, S.J.: “Mary’s faith sustained her through the years at Nazareth. But it was especially her faith from Calvary to Easter Sunday that the Church commemorates each Saturday of the year as a Day of Faith. She had no doubt that her Son, though crucified, would rise from the dead.” (CCC 149) - Marian Catechist Manual.
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
149 Throughout her life and until her last ordeal when Jesus her son died on the cross, Mary’s faith never wavered. She never ceased to believe in the fulfillment of God’s word. And so the Church venerates in Mary the purest realization of faith.
she was overshadowed with the silence of the mystery that she did not understand, and with this silence, she has accepted that this mystery can grow and flourish in the hope.
That’s not all he said, or we wouldn’t have been having this discussion to begin with. Isn’t it disingenuous to truncate his comments?
No it is not the complete homily; His Holiness also very graphically expressed the “the shocking mystery of this self- emptying” as John Paul II called it. But what I cited is the conclusion of the homily on the topic.
And failed to cite the portion that provoked this discussion to begin with.
Like I said, he’s playing a game. Just like he truncates our posts when we use the word “hypothetical”.
Time for us to move on. I have no doubt (lol) that time will prove us correct and annalex incorrect.
The Gospel tells us nothing: if she said a word or not ... She was quiet, but in her heart - how much she said to the Lord! 'You told me then - that's what we have read - that He will be great. You told me that You would give him the throne of his father David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. And now I see Him there!' The Blessed Mother was human! And perhaps she would have wanted to say, 'lies! I have been cheated!'. John Paul II said this when he spoke of the Mother of God at one point. But she was overshadowed with the silence of the mystery that she did not understand, and with this silence, she has accepted that this mystery can grow and flourish in the hope.
As you can plainly see there is nothing unorthodox in the passage as a whole.
:-)
Everyone can see your posts in full, as well as the text of the encyclical as excerpted by the source blog. If you cannot substantiate your views, you have yourselves to blame.
St. Thomas, Summa Theologica:
I answer that, In every genus, the nearer a thing is to the principle, the greater the part which it has in the effect of that principle, whence Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv) that angels, being nearer to God, have a greater share than men, in the effects of the Divine goodness. Now Christ is the principle of grace, authoritatively as to His Godhead, instrumentally as to His humanity: whence (John 1:17) it is written: “Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” But the Blessed Virgin Mary was nearest to Christ in His humanity: because He received His human nature from her. Therefore it was due to her to receive a greater fulness of grace than others.
All the above is just blasphemous speculation by a liberal Jesuit.
"Holy Spirit, of Whom Mary is the spouse, have mercy on us."
Very disturbing....
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.