Posted on 05/31/2011 11:53:33 AM PDT by marshmallow
The Protoevangelium of James
“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).
“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).
“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).
“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).
Origen
“The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).
Hilary of Poitiers
“If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]).
Athanasius
“Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 120 [A.D. 374]).
“And to holy Mary, [the title] ‘Virgin’ is invariably added, for that holy woman remains undefiled” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 78:6 [A.D. 375]).
Jerome
“[Helvidius] produces Tertullian as a witness [to his view] and quotes Victorinus, bishop of Petavium. Of Tertullian, I say no more than that he did not belong to the Church. But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
“We believe that God was born of a virgin, because we read it. We do not believe that Mary was married after she brought forth her Son, because we do not read it. . . . You [Helvidius] say that Mary did not remain a virgin. As for myself, I claim that Joseph himself was a virgin, through Mary, so that a virgin Son might be born of a virginal wedlock” (ibid., 21).
Didymus the Blind
“It helps us to understand the terms ‘first-born’ and ‘only-begotten’ when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin ‘until she brought forth her first-born son’ [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin” (The Trinity 3:4 [A.D. 386]).
Ambrose of Milan
“Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son” (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]).
Pope Siricius I
“You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king” (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]).
Augustine
“In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave” (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]).
“It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?” (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]).
“Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband” (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]).
Leporius
“We confess, therefore, that our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, born of the Father before the ages, and in times most recent, made man of the Holy Spirit and the ever-virgin Mary” (Document of Amendment 3 [A.D. 426]).
Cyril of Alexandria
“[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing” (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).
Pope Leo I
“His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained” (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).
When a catholics talks about what they believe - surely fabrication follows. Nice of you to prove it, again.
Izzat so? Do you pray to Jesus or the Holy Spirit? Come on, be direct and accurate for once.
This is a tour de force of its kind.
Try this. In some homes, when the spouses part for the day, a kiss is exchanged. However they FEEL at the time, whether sleepy or amorous, affectionate or withdrawn, close or distant, the exchange of a kiss is a courtesy and a pledge to their shared commitment.
If that kiss were the only way they showed their commitment and love, something would be wrong. But the absence of that parting kiss may also show that something is wrong, possibly very wrong.
Also, it is always interesting to a Catholic to be taken to task for praying with the Scriptures.
You don’t need to believe me as to my intent; that’s your prerogative. Prayer is good ... alone or otherwise. Peace be with you.
It was an analogy between one kind of intimate communication and another. I was suggesting that just as a 'routine' kiss given without much emotion can be a real pledge of loving commitment so also praying "pre-printed words"(as opposed to POST-printed words?), especially words from the Bible, can be a prayer of commitment and love.
Besides, when one dedicates time to God, what comes from God to the one praying is more the point than what goes up to God from him, IMHO.
What does that leave - there is no verbal communication in a catholic household?
I don't understand what you are asking here. I have said specifically that if the morning goodbye kiss is the only sign of love between spouses something is wrong. And I have said that there is more to the prayer life of a devout Catholic than his "office".
It's more interesting why they speak of Scripture since it's not their Final Authority. One can't serve two masters.
This seems to be a new topic. It is said we do not read the Bible. But many of us pray with reading the Bible, especially the Psalms. And it is said we don't pray properly. Maybe that is as untrue as saying we don't read the Bible.
As for final authority, Jesus is mine, and I renew my pledge to Him several times a day, among which are those times when I pray my office.
"But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." Matt. 6:7.
Christ said this, not smvoice. It's written in RED. In your Bible.
Nothing like pre-printed, pre-written pre-approved prayers to make it feel from the heart. I supppose God is happy. THey sent Him copies so He could keep up...All sincere prayer is from the heart.
"But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." Matt. 6:7.
I wish I had a nickel for every time I've addressed this.
The repetitions I use are not 'vain', which I take to mean "empty." The Rosary is full of meaning and the 'lyrics' are only the externally visible/audible part. The internal meditations are the richness and fulness of the Rosary. In this connection in might be good to recall the caution against judging by outward appearance.
In any event, the injunction is against 'vain' repetition, not against all repetition.
Further, I do not think that I am heard for my much speaking. I am heard because God is gracious and not because of the quality of my prayer. IF it is meaningful to talk about some prayer being better than another, I would have to say that if I ever prayed a 'good' prayer that would have been a gift from God. I just don't see another reasonable way to think of it. I certainly don't think I am heard for my brevity or my much speaking or for anything of mine at all.
So I agree with Matt 6:7 (good thing, huh?) but don't think it applies to the way I pray.
Then many of the characterizations in your post,e.g.:
THey sent Him copies so He could keep up...
tells you how many Hail Marys you must say at this momentThe prayer to pray for more prayers to be written, so more prayer time could be arranged each day.
are untrue on their face, though they have hostile rhetorical force. So I think the words "bitter mockery" were justified.
I note that you did not respond to my attempts at counter-argument but only to "bitter mockery" and with a line from the Sermon on the Mount that does not apply to my prayer. The Lord's prayer, by the way, is "pre-printed," so I don't see how merely being set down in type is relevant.
So, is it "repetitions" that are bad or was Our Lord speaking of "vain repetitions," vainglory, and frivolousness? Was Our Lord wrong for praying the same prayer more than once, using the same words, in the Garden of Gethsemani? Are the angels in Heaven wrong for singing the Sanctus ("Holy, Holy, Holy") all day and night, without ceasing? Was God making a big mistake when He told Israel to pray the sh'ma all throughout the day? Are reading the Psalms a waste of time? Have Israelite, early Christian (Catholic), and modern Jewish, Catholic and Orthodox liturgists been praying "vainly" for all these millennia, only to be set straight in the past hundred or so years by sola scriptura Protestants? Is it wrong to sing hymns that have been sung, verbatim, before?Link
10 Hail Marys
1 Glory Be
1 Fatima Prayer
Repeat process with each mystery
End with Hail, Holy Queen.
What is this, if not vain repetitions?
Bitter mockery, Mad Dawg? Please explain the above to me. THEN we will discuss "bitter mockery".
The repetitions I use are not 'vain', which I take to mean "empty." The Rosary is full of meaning and the 'lyrics' are only the externally visible/audible part. The internal meditations are the richness and fulness of the Rosary. In this connection in might be good to recall the caution against judging by outward appearance.
What you posted (without a discussion of "Repeat process with each mystery") is a description of the outward appearance. I gave a little talk this Sat on the Rosary this last Saturday. I didn't mention the "Hail Mary" once. I was talking about the 'mysteries.'
You might as well describe the marital act as "inserting tab A in slot B."
If one is given a recipe for prayer, that is, follow the words, repeat the process 10 times, or whatever, and has a beginning instruction to be followed, and an ending instructions to be followed, it is a repetition. No matter how pretty it seems. If that prayer is performed as a means to please God, with all the repetitions, then it is a VAIN repetition. What if a person only performs 9 Hail Marys? What if they forget to do the 1 Glory Be? Well, they can't. Because there are 2000 people repeating the process as one, reading what they are to say next. One can hardly forget when everyone around is saying the same thing at the same time.
You seem to be saying this as a good thing. Am I not understanding your answer?
What is this, if not vain repetitions?The rosary is useful, not vain.
"It is not just a conglomeration of Our Fathers and Hail Marys, but on the contrary it is a divine summary of the mysteries of the life, Passion, death and glory of Jesus and Mary." --St. Louis de MontfortHeck, even Elvis sang "Miracle of the Rosary."
Elvis sang "Jail House Rock", too. But that doesn't mean the warden's throwing a party.
Now, how is this considered NOT vain repetitions?
Have you read what I've written on the subject in this thread and in my recent answers to your question? The mysteries are extraordinarily full of meaning. I have recently been asked to write a book on them. IF I do (and I think I probably will, D.V.) you want to buy a copy? I'll sign it --- how about with flammable ink?
Here, I wrote this to a dear (but pagan) friend:
Of the new set of mysteries -- the Luminous Mysteries -- suggested by Blessed John Paul the Great the first is the Baptism of our Lord. Here goes:Empty?Jesus was baptized in the Jordan. The Jordan rises in Syrian marshes, flows through the Sea of Galilee, and winds -- 100 miles as the crow flies but treble that length were we to walk along its banks -- to the Dead Sea.
And you know why the Dead Sea is dead. It has no outlet. It does not give. What water it loses is torn from it by the sun's heat. "If you give, you live." It does not give. It is dead.
Swamps are so alive! You can see the haze and hear the susurration of insects. Crawling things creep among the clumps of sedges, and small creatures crabs, worms, eels, minnows live in the water.
The Sea of Galilee was so fertile that communities could support themselves on the fish that lived there.
The Jordan flows between generous life and grasping death. And there, between Life and Death, our Lord comes down to be bathed.
He came from Life itself, and he call himself life. And yet he came to us to die. He is between Life and Death. And we are between Life and Death -- tired of living and afraid of dying, as even one of the poets has said. :-)
He comes to us where we are, and he comes as we are, in need of washing. In the winding way between life and death, he meets us as we seek forgiveness of sin.
It is always asked; John asked it first: Do you come to ME to be baptized? Why does he come to be cleansed who is himself purity?
He comes to make clean. His descent into the Jordan makes it holy, as his descent into our lives makes us holy. In the tea you may now be drinking, in the water you splashed on your face this morning, why, in the humidity of the air we breathe, there may be a drop, a molecule of the water which once ran through our Lord's hair, down his face and body, and back into the Jordan from where it sanctifies and vivifies all the water that ever was.
Between life and death, you are in the stream, the stream which washed the Lord. It may, it certainly does, draw us to death, which of its own accord gives up nothing. But the light of the Son compels it to yield us up, and draws us with might into the heavens from which we too may help to spread life.
As for the 'what ifs': You obviously haven't been to my parish. A couple of weeks ago the leader got mixed up and did one mystery twice. A Filipina lady always bellows the prayers and does her own private version of the Fatima prayer, at what seems like the top of her lungs. WHATever ...
Anyway a lot of pray the Rosary at home as well.
If that prayer is performed as a means to please God, with all the repetitions, then it is a VAIN repetition.
What if it is not done with that intention at all -- as I just said at length a few posts above?
THANKS MUCH BRO.
I think Eric Fromme is spelled differently then From. LOL.
Not sure if Eric is Eric or Erich—been a long time.
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.