Replies

Be careful when you decide to try to use the Church against itself. Through your Ignorance (Websters def: - a lack of knowledge, understanding, or education) of the Catholic Church the Apostles started so long ago- you can easily make yourself look self-refuting and/or contradictory.

Undisputed history from the Roman Catholic Church shows that the “Immaculate Conception” doctrine didn’t come from the original church,

The Orthodox Church never had the “Immaculate Conception” doctrine. It rejects it as a “Roman novelty.”

Why you would refer to the Sanctity of the Blessed Virgin Mary as a “novelty” in any description – I cannot comprehend. Though I do comprehend, quite easily, the rest of you position is an illogical, and incorrect attempt to try to support your falsehoods.

Now what you say is true, the Orthodox Church- which schismed from the Papacy a millennia after the Resurrection… does not hold the IC as a belief. This is true. Not the end of the world- but I think your saying you support their (the Orthodox) position on this as true as well.
So it follows then, if you hold their position on the IC to be true in this case, then you ALSO have to believe that they are correct in the Blessed Virgin Mary’s sinlessness in life as they hold that as true.

DO YOU BELIEVE MARY did not sin in her life? Well YOU MUST then if you hold true that the Orthodox position elsewhere- if you agree with how they reject the IC as doctrine. OR… IF you DON’T believe in the sinlessness of the Virgin Mary (“all have sinned”) THEN the Orthodox you are holding up to support your IC views- contradict your ability to hold them up in the way that you do.

I mean its pretty straightforward- either they (Orthodox) are always are right or always wrong- if THEY are your standard. You can’t pick and choose like you’re doing. The same holds true for the Papacy. If your standard is the "Original" Church - know that they were accepting of, and being under the episcopate authority of the Bishop of Rome (See Clement). It was only centuries later- until they would develop the anti-Papal doctrine that would cause the Orthodox schism. Now follow this - if the Orthodox are correct in developing doctrine TO REJECT the Papacy in the 11th century- which I’m sure you would agree with… than you MUST dismiss and reject their “Original” Church doctrines as incorrect and unbiblical. More fun- if you ACCEPT the development of Doctrine over time- as with their anti-Papcacy belief- than you CAN NOT REJECT development of doctrine as a process to establish rules of Faith.
So if you want to use the “Early” Church as some wedge between the western to Church and the Papacy- and then have to pick and choose what the Early Church fathers believed - and DID NOT Believe- then you are on might shaky (sandy) ground there. And that’s not even going near the Eucharistic Doctrines of the Entire Early Church.

You would have to be intellectually dishonest to hold the “Original” Church up as True - by picking and choosing ONLY THOSE beliefs which you want to call “correct” and support your modern ideal of Christianity.

The way I see it – any non-Catholic who wants to use the “Original” church (as you have here)– and also bring in the “Orthodox” then - as “points” or a standard to support their rejection of the Catholic Church calls themselves into being as hypocritical then. You continue:

…To the original church, questions about Mary were a mere tangent next to its UNITED focus on JESUS. But over the years, the Catholic Church took its eyes off Jesus and started to focus on this Mary tangent, causing great controversy in the church.

You could not be more uneducated or mis-informed of the Catholic Faith. To say.. “the Catholic Church took its eyes off Jesus and started to focus on this Mary tangent…” is just pure ignorance. The Body of Christ – The Holy August Sacrifice of the Mass – has been the source and summit of the Church for 2,000 years from the Last Supper, through the Didache, through St .Paul all the way up through the ages until today… on every Altar of every Church- Just as Christ wanted. “Took its eye’s off Jesus” is so lacking in understanding. Are eyes are fixed on Christ at every Mass. Whoever is telling you this crap- you and he or she BOTH need to go to Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament and find out what you don’t know. Do not go if you do not wish to have your eyes opened like they were with disciples in Emmaus though...
Some Scripture:

"And the angel came in unto her, and said, hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women." - Luke 1:28

It is the term "full of grace" that is emphasized by the Church when dealing with Mary's Immaculate Conception. The title "full of grace" comes from the Greek word kecharitomene, which describes a "perfection" and "abundance" of grace. In other words, Mary was proclaimed by the angel to be with a perfection of grace, which was a very powerful statement. How can Mary be completely and perfectly with God's grace, yet still have sin left in her?

"the Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow you: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of you shall be called the Son of God." - Luke 1:35

Luke 1:35 shows Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant. According to the Old Testament, the Ark of the Covenant was the pure and holy vessel that held the Ten Commandments (the Old Covenant). The Ark was so holy in fact, that if anyone where to touch it they could actually fall down and die! It was housed in the Holy of Holies, which was a perfectly clean place where the Jewish high priests could enter only once a year according to their law. Mary, the New Ark, holds the New Covenant in her womb, which is Jesus Christ. How much holier is Christ than the Ten Commandments? It only makes sense that for Mary to hold God in her womb, she too would be completely pure and without any sin.

Today’s Mass Gospel reading- (yes Catholics have Mass EVERYDAY and we Read the Liturgy of the Word- The Scriptures – EVERYDAY -)
IRONICALLY -Today's reading tells us “NOTHING is impossible with God”.

So...You may choose not to believe it- you may choose to believe you can bind God to ONLY the pages of the Canon of the Bible determined by Man – and commit yourself to putting God within the limitations of our sinful human minds….as if WE KNOW what's best for God...

You may choose to do this…. But I can not- and won’t.

Now what you say is true, the Orthodox Church- which schismed from the Papacy a millennia after the Resurrection… does not hold the IC as a belief. This is true. Not the end of the world- but I think your saying you support their (the Orthodox) position on this as true as well.

So it follows then, if you hold their position on the IC to be true in this case, then you ALSO have to believe that they are correct in the Blessed Virgin Mary’s sinlessness in life as they hold that as true.

The point is very simple and has nothing to do with agreeing with the Orthodox church. If the IC was the position of the Roman Catholic church from the start then it follows that it would be the position of the Orthodox Church as well. The fact that it rejects the IC proves that it was never an agreed upon idea in the Roman Catholic church (before Pius IX one day declared it to be true).

You have your belief that the Catholic Church hasn’t taken its eyes off of Jesus.

I absolutely believe otherwise. I grew up in a place that was around 80% Catholic. I’ve known a great many Catholics closely, including some in my family. I’ve only met a couple who know which end is up on the Bible (I’m using an idiom to make a point, but it’s not exaggerating by much), and as a consequence, they know very little about Jesus and His story. They especially don’t know Him personally. Personal knowing is the truth Jesus revealed, the things He taught and said, His personality, and His actions. Plenty know the Rosary and highlights from the Catechism, but that’s it. So there’s a tremendous void in their knowledge of the Lord that gets filled by other things.