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]).
Glad I struck a nerve.
That one’s needed a good strike for a long time.
The first ever I heard of Protestants persecuting and murdering Catholics for the sole crime of being Catholic is when the accusation was thrown out on FR when the Inquisition by the Catholic church, with it’s well known and documented history, was brought up.
I’ve seen scores of accusations about the horrible persecution of Catholics in the Colonies and not one scrap of hard physical evidence. If the Inquisition of the Dark Ages was so well documented, surely anything happening more recently ought to have an equally credible, documented history.
Where is it, I wonder?
Actually he is sitting at the right hand until his enemies are made his footstool.
The right hand is a symbol of power used throughout the Old Testament.
Psalms 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.
:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
:5 The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.
:6 He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.
:7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head.
:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
YHVH is one (echad)
He came in the flesh
It is His omnipresence which man cannot comprehend
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Mathew 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
Zechariah 13:6 And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
Well put.
It’s not really very surprising that folks who have trouble reading plain Scripture with even a hint of understanding
would have trouble telling the difference between what Cronos does vs what I do.
Fascinating.
How that would qualify as a prayer is totally beyond me.
That is ludicrous to claim that every time Jesus talked to His mother, He was praying to her.
Likewise it is ludicrous to think that every time I ask someone a favor, it is praying to them.
That is just mind boggling semantic games used to justify something that cannot be defended in any other way.
Wellllllllll, Dear Heart . . . one has to understand their mentality, spirit, attitude . . .
ANY insult, slight, injury
to a single Vatican Cult member
is equal to
100 times worse and more
to a Proddy.
Because Ishtar-Mary loves Vatican Cult members sooooooooooooo much MORE, you see.
So a few thousand Proddys here, a few thousand mangled there, a few thousand shredded over yonder . . . no biggy.
A Vatican Cult members little daughter’s white hanky gets a spatter of mud on it from a Proddy—it’s enough to start a war!
. . . not to mention all manner of gilded distortions and lies about the incident forevermore!
Now, now, Dear Heart.
We must not forget . . .
Mind bogglingly complex semantic games are the foundation of the Vatican Cult.
How else do they claim to have begun 300-400 years before they did?
How else do they claim justification for Deifying Ishtar-Mary?
The whole problem with calling Mary *the Mother of God* is that it erroneously gives the impression that she is the mother of God, period, putting her above God.
The logic with the false premise that Jesus is God, Mary is Jesus’ mother, therefore Mary is God’s mother, ignores the fact that God is not Jesus alone.
Based on Catholic teaching that the Trinity comprises the Godhead, saying that Mary was the mother of God, would also include that Mary is the mother of God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit. Since there is no record of either the Father or the Holy Spirit having a mother, it is inaccurate and imprecise to call Mary the mother of God implying that she is the mother of all of them.
She is the mother of the Messiah, Christ. She bore the second person of the Trinity, not the entire Trinity itself as calling her the mother of God implies, and indeed actually states.
Now now.
There ya go agin trying to be rational and reasonable about the Vatican Cult.
Wouldn’t you have to do penance for that if you were still in it?
If they ever were to admit the truth of what you wrote, they’d have to demote Ishtar-Mary.
Given that Ishtar-Mary was designed to manipulate God with her ‘Motherly ways,’ THAT would NEVER do!
Quix' comment were in regular font, Cronos. Who is stirring up the brethren?
From me, nope.
One of us is in error.
I'll go for marbren for $1000, Alex.
Yep...The Great “I am that I am” has no mother.
Remarkable they continue to believe God has a mother. Especially when they claim to be the sole interpreters of the scriptures. Since they majorly messed up on who God is, because if they knew who God is they could never say He had a mother, then nothing else they claim can be trusted.
I watch Jeopardy ever night. I do seem to fall asleep many times during the commercial before final Jeopardy. Recently I got DVR so I can rewind when I wake up.
That's a HUGE taking out of context Mad Dawg. Jesus was being firm with her as she was attempting to jump start that which He was appointed to be and do... Mothers do that...it's called interfering.
“”Based on Catholic teaching that the Trinity comprises the Godhead, saying that Mary was the mother of God, would also include that Mary is the mother of God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit””
Dear Sister, you claim you understood what the Church teaching was when you were in the Catholic Church,but obviously there are many basic teachings you did not understand.
Here is something from Lumen Gentium to help you
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
“”The Virgin Mary, who at the message of the angel received the Word of God in her heart and in her body and gave Life to the world, is acknowledged and honored as being truly the Mother of God and Mother of the Redeemer. Redeemed by reason of the merits of her Son and united to Him by a close and indissoluble tie, she is endowed with the high office and dignity of being the Mother of the Son of God, by which account she is also the beloved daughter of the Father and the temple of the Holy Spirit.””
I hope your health is doing better these days,I have prayed for you
Thanks for your kind reply.
There are probably multiple motives for most of us in our posting most of the time.
My more . . . pointed posts . . . are usually responding to some outrageousness obnoxiousness from the RC’s (et al) with a type of . . . other-than-warm-fuzzy response.
It just seems that they can’t go for toooo long before their chronic institutionalized arrogance starts feeling its uppity oats and throwing their sanctimonious exclusivist UNBIBLICAL nonsense around, WITH AN ATTITUDE.
At some point, I get my fill of seeing so much of it and slap back at them.
Others, by contrast, as you are likely aware . . . seem to have made an avocation of baiting, poking specific individuals with a very hot poker in predictably tender provocative places—relentlessly.
Only to ‘play innocent,’ if they get the desired protesting response.
At some point, I get weary of that silliness, too.
Thankfully, The Lord knows the secret intents of every corner of our hearts and every nuance of our motives.
Good post!
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.