Mary, Mother of God

The Sacred Page ^ | December 29, 2015

[NYer]

January 1 is the Solemnity (Holy Day) of Mary, Mother of God.  To call Mary the “Mother of God” must not be understood as a claim for Mary’s motherhood of divinity itself, but in the sense that Mary was mother of Jesus, who is truly God.  The Council of Ephesus in 431—long before the schisms with the Eastern churches and the Protestants—proclaimed “Mother of God” a theologically correct title for Mary. 

So far from being a cause of division, the common confession of Mary as “Mother of God” should unite all Christians, and distinguish Christian orthodoxy from various confusions of it, such as Arianism (the denial that Jesus was God) or Nestorianism (in which Mary mothers only the human nature of Jesus but not his whole person).

Two themes are present in the Readings for this Solemnity: (1) the person of Mary, and (2) the name of Jesus.   Why the name of Jesus? Prior to the second Vatican Council, the octave day of Christmas was the Feast of the Holy Name, not Mary Mother of God.  The legacy of that tradition can be seen in the choice of Readings for this Solemnity.  (The Feast of the Holy Name was removed from the calendar after Vatican II; St. John Paul II restored it as an optional memorial on January 3.  This year it is not observed in the U.S., because Epiphany falls on January 3.)

1.  The First Reading is Numbers 6:22-27:

The LORD said to Moses:
“Speak to Aaron and his sons and tell them:
This is how you shall bless the Israelites.
Say to them:
The LORD bless you and keep you!
The LORD let his face shine upon
you, and be gracious to you!
The LORD look upon you kindly and
give you peace!
So shall they invoke my name upon the Israelites,
and I will bless them.”

This Solemnity is one of the very few times that the Book of Numbers is read on a Lord’s Day or Feast Day.  Here’s a little background on the Book of Numbers:

The Book of Numbers is a little less neglected than Leviticus among modern Christian readers, if only because, unlike its predecessor, it combines its long lists of laws with a number of dramatic narratives about the rebellions of Israel against God in the wilderness, which create literary interest.  The name “Numbers” is, perhaps, already off-putting for the modern reader—it derives from the Septuagint name Arithmoi, “Numbers”, referring to the two numberings or censuses, one each of the first and second generations in the Wilderness, that form the pillars of the literary structure of the book in chs. 1 and 26.  The Hebrew name is bamidbar, “In the Wilderness,” which is an accurate description of the geographical and spiritual location of Israel throughout most of the narrative.

         The Book of Numbers has a strong literary relationship with its neighbors in the Pentateuch.  In many ways it corresponds with the Book of Exodus.  Exodus begins with the people staying in Egypt (Exodus 1-13), then describes their journey to through the desert (Exodus 14-19), and ends with them stationary at Sinai (20-36).  Numbers begins with the people staying at Sinai (Num 1-10), describes their journey through the desert (Num 11-25), and ends with them stationary on the Plains of Moab.  Sinai and the Plains of Moab correspond: at each location the people will receive a covenant (see below on Deuteronomy).  Furthermore, there are strong literary connections between the journeys through the Wilderness to and from Sinai (Ex 14-19; Num 11-25).  Both these sections are dominated by accounts of the people of Israel “murmuring” (Heb. lôn), “rebelling” (Heb. mārāh), or “striving” (Heb. rîb) against the LORD and/or Moses, together with Moses’ need for additional help to rule an unruly people (Ex 18; Num 11:16-39), and God’s miraculous provision for the people’s physical needs (Ex 15:22-17:7; Num 11:31-34; 20:1-13).  This is evidence of careful literary artistry: the central Sinai Narrative (Exod 20–Num 10) is surrounded by the unruly behavior of the people wandering in the desert.

         Numbers also has a close relationship with Leviticus.  If Leviticus established a sacred “constitution” for the life of Israel, exhibiting a logical, systematic order concluded, like a good covenant document, with a listing of blessings and curses (Lev 26), Numbers is more like a list of “amendments” to the “constitution,” together with accounts of the historical circumstances that led to their enactment.  And like the lists of amendments on many state and national constitutions, the laws have an ad hoc, circumstantial character, with little logical connection between successive “amendments.” 

         Finally, Numbers “sets the stage” for the Book of Deuteronomy, providing us the necessary information about Israel’s geographical and moral condition when they arrived at the “Plains of Moab opposite Jericho” in order to appreciate Moses’ extended homily and renewal of the covenant that he will deliver at this site in the final book of the Pentateuch.

The specific text we have in this First Reading is the famous Priestly Blessing of Numbers 6.  The formula for blessing given to the priests involves the invocation of the Divine Name (YHWH) three times over the people of Israel. 

A Brief Excursus on the Divine Name

“If they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say?” “God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM,” say … “I AM has sent me to you” (Ex 3:13-14).  The revelation of the divine Name to Moses (Ex 3:13-15) is one of the most theologically significant passages of the Old Testament.  By revealing himself as “I AM”, God distinguishes himself from the other gods of the nations, which “are not.”  He is the only God who truly is.  Furthermore, the name “I AM” stresses that God exists of himself; unlike all other beings he does not take his existence from some other cause.  Later philosophical language will describe God as the one necessary being.  While lacking technical philosophical language, the ancients did have the concept of self-existence: in Egyptian religion, the sun-god Amon-RÄ“ “came into being by himself” and all other beings took their existence from him.  However, God reveals to Moses that it is He, the LORD—not Amon-RÄ“ or any other Egyptian god—who is the ground of being and the source of existence. 

The actual word given to Israel to serve as the Name of God is spelled YHWH in the English equivalents of the Hebrew consonants. It is not the full phrase “I AM WHO I AM” but rather an archaic form of the Hebrew verb HYH, “to be,” with the meaning “HE IS.” Out of respect for the third commandment, Jews after the Babylonian exile (c. 597–537 BC) ceased to pronounce the divine name at all, but instead substituted the title “Lord,” in Hebrew adonai, in Greek kyrios.  Thus the God of Israel is called ho kyrios, “the Lord” in the New Testament.  This sheds light on the meaning of the phrase, “Jesus is Lord!” (Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3).

The Hebrew language was written without vowels until around AD 700, when Jewish scribes developed a vowel-writing system.  The form YHWH, however, was written with the vowels for adonai, the word Jews actually pronounced.  The English translators of the King James Version did not understand this system, and in a few instances combined the Hebrew consonants of YHWH (called the tetragrammaton, lit. “the four letters”) with the Hebrew vowels of adonai to form the erroneous name “Jehovah.”  Catholic tradition addresses God with neither the mistaken form “Jehovah” nor the ancient pronunciation “Yahweh,” but uses “LORD” to refer to the God of Israel, in keeping with the practice of Jesus and the Apostles.  In most English Bibles, “LORD” in caps represents YHWH in the Hebrew text, while “Lord” in lower case represents the actual Hebrew word adonai.

The concept of “name” in Hebrew culture was of great significance.  The “name” represented the essence of the person, and invoking the name made the person mystically present.  Therefore, God will speak of the manifestation of his presence in the Temple as the “dwelling of his Name” in various places of the Old Testament.

The invocation of the Name of God over the people of Israel communicates God’s presence and Spirit to them at least a mediated way. 

In post-exilic Judaism, the Divine Name (YHWH) was seldom if ever pronounced, except on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), when the High Priest would make atonement for the whole nation in the Holy of Holies, and then exit the Temple in order to bless the assembled people in the Temple courts.  There, he would pronounce the blessing of Numbers 6, including the vocalization of the Divine Name.  Every time the people would hear the Name pronounced, they would drop prostrate on the ground.  This is recorded in Sirach:

Sir. 50:20 Then Simon came down, and lifted up his hands over the whole congregation of the sons of Israel, to pronounce the blessing of the Lord with his lips, and to glory in his name, and to glory in his name;  21 and they bowed down in worship a second time, to receive the blessing from the Most High.

Similar information is recorded in the Mishnah, the second-century AD collection of rabbinic tradition and teaching that become the basis of the legal system of modern Judaism.  So in the Mishnah, tractate Yoma 3:8 and 6:2:

And [when the people heard the four letter Name] they answer after [the High Priest]: “Blessed be the Name of His glorious Kingdom forever and ever”. (M. Yoma 3:8)

Then, the priests and the people standing in the courtyard, when they heard the explicit Name from the mouth of the High Priest, would bend their knees, bow down and fall on their faces, and they would say, "Blessed be the Honored Name of His Sovereignty forever!" (M. Yoma 6:2)

We read this passage of Scripture in today’s liturgy for a variety of reasons. 

First, we gather as God’s people around the world on this, the first day of the civil year, to ask from God his blessing upon us. 

Second, we commemorate (in the Gospel) the circumcision and naming of Jesus.  For us in the New Covenant, the Name of God continues to be a source of blessing and Divine Presence, but the name we are to use is no longer YHWH but “Jesus.”  Jesus is God’s Name, the source of salvation.  When Paul speaks to the Philippians about the Name of Jesus, he may have in mind the prostrations in the Temple at the Divine Name:

Phil. 2:10  At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth …

It has never been the Christian tradition to pronounce the holy name “YHWH.”  Jesus and the Apostles practiced the Jewish piety of substituting “Lord” (‘adonai, kyrios, dominus) for the pronunciation of the Name.  For this reason, under the pontificate of Benedict XVI, the pronounced name “Yahweh” was removed from contemporary worship resources.  The sect of the Jehovah’s Witnesses insist on the pronunciation of the Name, although their form of pronunciation is erroneous, and there is nothing in Christian tradition or the New Testament to encourage such a practice.  For us, the saving name is now “Jesus,” and although full prostration at the pronunciation of the name of Jesus is impractical, Catholic piety dictates a bow of the head at the mention of the Holy Name.

2.  The Second Reading is Galatians 4:4-7:

Brothers and sisters:

When the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son,

born of a woman, born under the law,

to ransom those under the law,

so that we might receive adoption as sons.

As proof that you are sons,

God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts,

crying out, “Abba, Father!”

So you are no longer a slave but a son,

and if a son then also an heir, through God.

This Reading has ties to the Gospel, which emphasizes Mary’s role in Christ’s birth (“born of a woman”) as well as Jesus and his family being obedient Jews, faithful to the Old Covenant in submitting to circumcision (“born under the law.”)

This Reading also reminds us that Jesus calls us to Divine sonship (or childhood, if gender neutrality is desired).  Let’s not forget that this is unique to the Christian faith.  Christianity—unlike Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Atheism—is a religion about becoming children of God.  In Judaism, Divine childhood is metaphorical; in Islam, it is blasphemy.  In Eastern religions, it is irrelevant, because God is not ultimately a personal being, but rather an impersonal force or essence that animates all or simply is All.  Christianity alone holds out the possibility of familial intimacy with Creator as a son or daughter to a Father.

Let us also notice the close connection between the gift of the Holy Spirit and divine sonship.  From a legal perspective, it is the New Covenant that makes us children of God; from an ontological perspective, it is the Spirit that makes us children.  The sending of the Spirit “into our hearts,” as St. Paul says, is parallel to the inbreathing of the “breath of life” into the nostrils of Adam, causing him to become “a living being.”  So we are revivified by the Holy Spirit, as Adam was brought to life at the dawn of time.  Adam was king of the universe, as it says: “Have dominion over the over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth” (Gen 1:28).  The word “dominion” (Heb radah) evokes the context of kingly rule: later it will be used of Solomon’s imperial reign (1 Kings 4:24; Ps 72:8; 110:2; 2 Chr 8:10).  So the Holy Spirit makes us royalty in Christ: as St. Paul says, “no longer a slave but a son … also an heir, through God.”  No longer a slave to what?  Sin, death, and the devil.  If we live controlled by lusts, in fear of death, and swayed by the suggestions of Satan, than we are still slaves.  If we are free of these things, then we are walking in the Spirit, as children of God.  This is a theme in the First Epistle of John, which is read during daily mass all through the Christmas season.

4.  The Gospel is Luke 2:16-21:

The shepherds went in haste to Bethlehem and found Mary and Joseph,

and the infant lying in the manger.

When they saw this,

they made known the message

that had been told them about this child.

All who heard it were amazed

by what had been told them by the shepherds.

And Mary kept all these things,

reflecting on them in her heart.

Then the shepherds returned,

glorifying and praising God

for all they had heard and seen,

just as it had been told to them.

When eight days were completed for his circumcision,

he was named Jesus, the name given him by the angel

before he was conceived in the womb.

We note several things: Mary “kept all these things, reflecting on them in her heart.”  This is not only an historical indication of where St. Luke is getting his information about these events (so John Paul II [in his Wednesday audience of Jan. 28, 1987] and the Catholic tradition generally), but also a model of the contemplative vocation to which all Christians are called.  Especially during this Christmas season, up until the Baptism (Jan 13), we should carve out some time for quiet prayer, to meditate on the incredible events we celebrate and allow their meaning to sink into our hearts. 

Then we see the shepherds “glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen …”  This, too, describes the Christian’s vocation.  Pope Francis in particular has been calling us to return to the aspect of praise and joy that characterizes the disciple of Jesus.  Our faith is experiential, it is not just a philosophy.  It is an encounter with a person.  All of us should know what it means to come into contact with Jesus, to “hear and see” him.  In his First Epistle (which we are reading right now in daily mass), St. John sounds much like the shepherds:

1John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life —  2 the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us —  3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.  4 And we are writing this that our joy may be complete.

Observe the connection in this passage with “seeing” and “hearing” and the culmination in proclamation and joy.  This is what disciples of Jesus do: they experience Jesus and then proclaim in joy what they have encountered.

Finally, we see the naming of Jesus at his circumcision.  Christians no longer practice circumcision, because Baptism is the “circumcision of the heart” promised by Moses that surpasses physical circumcision (cf. Deut 10:16; 30:6; Acts 2:37; Col 2:11-12).  Yet at our Baptism, the “circumcision of our heart,” we still receive our Christian name.

The name given to Jesus is the Hebrew word y’shua, meaning “salvation.”  In the Old Testament, we are more familiar with the name under the form “Joshua,” who was an important type of Christ.  Just as Moses was unable to lead the people of Israel into the promised land, but Joshua did; so also Jesus is our New Joshua who takes us into the salvation to which Moses and his covenant could not lead us.

Salvation is now found in the Name of Jesus, because salvation means to enter into a relationship of childhood with God the Father.  It’s not that other great religious leaders (Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius etc.) claimed to be able to lead us into divine childhood, but couldn’t. It’s that they did not even claim to be able to do so.  Jesus is unique.  So Jesus says, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6).  This is not arrogance.  Jesus is the only great religious founder in human history to proclaim that God is a Father and we can become his children.  This concept of divine filiation is at the heart of the Gospel.  In a sense, it can be said to be the heart of the Gospel. 

On this Solemnity, let us give thanks to God that he has, through Jesus, made a way for us to become his children and receive a new name which he has given us (see Rev 2:17).  This intimate, personal relationship with God has been made possible by the cooperation of Mary, who became the mother of the one whose Name is Salvation. 

[ealgeone]

Jesus gave more glory to God his Father by submitting to his Mother for thirty years than he would have given him had he converted the whole world by working the greatest miracles. How highly then do we glorify God when to please him we submit ourselves to Mary, taking Jesus as our sole model.

I guess the writer nor the poster isn't familiar with John 17.

This is why Christianity rejects roman catholic tradition.

[DungeonMaster]

I guess the writer nor the poster isn't familiar with John 17.

I post De Montfort quotes to show just how far some Catholics go in their "adoration" of Mary. Most Catholics are not aware that it goes to this level.

[daniel1212]

16. God the Father gave his only Son to the world only through Mary. Whatever desires the patriarchs may have cherished, whatever entreaties the prophets and saints of the Old Law may have had for 4,000 years to obtain that treasure, it was Mary alone who merited it and found grace before God by the power of her prayers and the perfection of her virtues.

And just where or where do you see this even intimated in Scripture? Mary was graced - unmerited favor (cf. Eph. 1:6) because of who she carried, and nowhere does it say or infer Mary was chosen due to her meriting it by the by the power of her prayers and the perfection of her virtues??? The Holy Spirit mentions souls like Noah who were "perfect" and upright, and how the Son was sinless, but never says that of holy Mary, and does not even mention her praying until Acts 1. Dare you add to the word of God, and charge the Holy Spirit with inconsistency and neglect, seeing as He is careful to mention exceptions to the norm, even more minor ones (extra fingers, height, longevity, etc.) among less notable characters? And gives to no created being anything close to the exalted superlatives and adulation and attributes ascribed to Mary by Catholic devotees! This thinking sir of mortals far "above that which is written" (1Co. 4:6) is parroting blasphemy, and the Mary of Scripture will condemn it!

17. God the Father imparted to Mary his fruitfulness as far as a mere creature was capable of receiving it, to enable her to bring forth his Son and all the members of his mystical body.

And just where do you see this in Scripture, and or as required? The Holy Spirit speaks of a place being filled with the Holy Spirit so much that men could not stand, and even one the face of Moses shining because of it, but does not even show Mary being prayed to, and overall says very little of her. And nowhere does the Spirit honor Mary one who brought forth all the members of his mystical body, which extrapolation would lead all the way back to Eve!

And as the Lord breathed His pure words thru Adamic men, so the Lord Jesus could have come into this world thru a

18. God the Son came into her virginal womb as a new Adam into his earthly paradise, to take his delight there and produce hidden wonders of grace.God-made-man found freedom in imprisoning himself in her womb.

And just where in Scripture do you see the womb of Mary described as an earthly paradise wherein the Son of God found freedom? Freedom in a womb? Poor God. How nice of you to help the Holy Spirit out to provide what He failed to do in inspiring His written word!

He found his glory and that of his Father in hiding his splendours from all creatures here below and revealing them only to Mary.

And where is this taught or evidenced? Instead, the Spirit mentions the Lord putting the Father's will first in response to her desires. (Lk. 2:49; Jn. 2:4)

Even at his death she had to be present so that he might be united with her in one sacrifice and be immolated with her consent to the eternal Father, just as formerly Isaac was offered in sacrifice by Abraham when he accepted the will of God. It was Mary who nursed him, fed him, cared for him, reared him, and sacrificed him for us.

Wrong, as unlike Abraham with Issac, Mary had no power to prevent Christ from being offered, and a sacrifice is something you control but choose to give up. The Lord said He laid His life down freely, and stayed behind in the temple contrary to the will of His earthly caretakers whom He created with the Father and Spirit, and later had to remind Mary that His obligation was to do His Father's will,(Lk. 2:49; Jn. 2:4) and at least delayed going to her when she wanted to see Him, and equated all who did His Father's will as being His mother and brethren. (Mt. 12:46-50) But with Caths its Mary, Mary, Mary with literally hundreds of superlative titles even blasphemously ascribing uniquely Divine attributes to their demonic (it is) heavenly demigoddess in their cultic unScriptural devotion to the invention they made of a pious, holy Spirit-filled vessel almighty God chose to use. And your wanton ascriptions above what is written have provoked this censure. Go ahead and whine like a liberal if you want.

[kinsman redeemer]

Oh!

Sorry.

What Louis de Montfort wrote is a crock.

(fixed.)

[verga]

Timeline of Pagan Heresies That are now Dogma (which cannot be found in Scripture, without distorting or downright lying about it!)

January - ME Januari(us), OE Januarius, translation of Latin Januarius, named after JANUS, god of beginnings.
February - ME OE Februarius from Latin Februarius, named for Februa, the feast of purification.
March - ME March(e), from Latin Martius, (month of) Mars.
April - ME Averil, OF Avril, Latin Aprilis mensis (month). The name may derive from the Greek goddess of love, Aphrodite.
May - ME OE Maius, Latin Maius mensis (month), from the Greek Maia, goddess of spring (growth).
June - ME Jun(e), OE Iunius, from Latin mensis Junius, named after the goddess Juno, Queen of the gods.
July - ME Julie, OE Julius, from Latin Julius (Caesar) after whom it was named in 44 BC. The original name was quintilis, fifth month in the early Roman calendar.
August - ME OE Agustus from Latin Augustus (Caesar) 8 BC. The original name was sextilis, sixth month in the early Roman calendar.
September - ME Septembre from Latin September, seventh month in the early Roman calendar
October - ME OE from Latin October, eighth month in the early Roman calendar
November - ME OE from Latin November, ninth month of the early Roman calendar, from novem NINE
December - ME Decembre from OF and Latin December, tenth month of the early Roman calendar (decem TEN + membri from mens MONTH + ri suffix)

Sunday - Sun's Day (Note: xtians/Roman catholics worship on this day. this was the day of the Roman Sun God)
Monday - Moon's Day
Tuesday - Tiw's Day (Norse God)
Wednesday - Woden's Day (Anglo-Saxon God)
Thursday - Thor's Day (Norse God)
Friday - Freyja's Day (Norse God)
Saturday - Saturn's Day

Valentines day-http://www.npr.org/2011/02/14/133693152/the-dark-origins-of-valentines-day
From Feb. 13 to 15, the Romans celebrated the feast of Lupercalia. The men sacrificed a goat and a dog, then whipped women with the hides of the animals they had just slain.
The brutal fete included a matchmaking lottery, in which young men drew the names of women from a jar. The couple would then be, um, coupled up for the duration of the festival — or longer, if the match was right.

Christmas Tree- Lutheran- Taken from the Druids.

Souls going to heaven-http://www.ucg.org/vertical-thought/paganism-in-christianity
Unfortunately, some of the most basic things believed by most professing Christians derive from ancient paganism rather than from the Bible. The idea that people have immortal souls was first taught in ancient Egypt and Babylon. The Greeks likewise taught that at death the soul would separate from the physical body ( Jewish Encyclopedia , 1941, Vol. 6, pp. 564, 566, “Immortality of the Soul”). That idea was merged into Christianity from Greek philosophy. It did not come from inspired Scripture.

The ancient Egyptians developed the concept of going to heaven. In their mythology, the god Osiris was killed but then raised back to life, whereupon he went to a distant heavenly realm. The Egyptians concluded that if he could do this, then human beings could follow ( Lewis Browne, This Believing World , pp. 83-84). This heavenly reward was a central teaching of several ancient mystery religions—

[Elsie]

Quit channeling Mrs.ELSIE!

[daniel1212]

I post De Montfort quotes to show just how far some Catholics go in their "adoration" of Mary. Most Catholics are not aware that it goes to this level.

Now you tell us! Don't do that without a qualifying statement, while i could have provided you with some more , including from the idolator De Montfort. Sorry for rebuking you as if you were engaging in the same, but that was outlandish. On the other hand, i can and do engage in idolatry whenever something created becomes my highest object of spiritual affection, object of allegiance, or source of security, but which is not the same as formally ascribing to created beings what belongs to God alone.

But so you know, RCs will deny that, no matter how it looks and sounds, the adulation they engage in is not actually (crossing that fine line into) "adoration," which is worship in Catholic nomenclature, which V2 teaches they and Muslims engage in toward the same God.

As often said, one would have a hard time in Bible times explaining kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them

Which manner of adulation would constitute worship in Scripture, yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

Moses, put down those rocks! I was only engaging in hyper dulia, not adoring her. Can't you tell the difference?

[Elsie]

At the wedding in Cana he changed water into wine at her humble prayer, and this was his first miracle in the order of nature.

Those damned Prots removed MORE of the Scriptures!!

---

John 2:1-12  Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

1 And the third day, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother of Jesus was there.

² And Jesus also was invited, and his disciples, to the marriage.

³ And the wine failing, the mother of Jesus saith to him: They have no wine.

⁴ And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what is that to me and to thee? my hour is not yet come.

⁵ His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye.

⁶ Now there were set there six waterpots of stone, according to the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three measures apiece.

⁷ Jesus saith to them: Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

⁸ And Jesus saith to them: Draw out now, and carry to the chief steward of the feast. And they carried it.

⁹ And when the chief steward had tasted the water made wine, and knew not whence it was, but the waiters knew who had drawn the water; the chief steward calleth the bridegroom,

¹⁰ And saith to him: Every man at first setteth forth good wine, and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse. But thou hast kept the good wine until now.

¹¹ This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee; and manifested his glory, and his disciples believed in him.

¹² After this he went down to Capharnaum, he and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they remained there not many days.

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

[Elsie]

God the Holy Spirit entrusted his wondrous gifts to Mary...

And I got a pedigreed unicorn for Christmas.

[Elsie]

Holy Mary, Mother of God,

the bible says...

...Mother of Jesus.

Why does Rome INSIST that it's followers use this OTHER term that is NOT found in Scripture?

[Elsie]

ABISHAG II

[Elsie]

I’ve told him a million times not to exaggerate!

[daniel1212]

Good list. I am sure none of those things will be in the Lord’s kingdom, save for the first day as the Lord’s, though the names of the months and days of the week are mere reference points, not the Christianized paganism of Rome which too many Prots perpetuate.

[Elsie]

Isn’t there an ‘official’ Catholic survey we could use?

Surely Rome would like to know where remedial catechism teaching is required.

[Elsie]

Peter Piper picked a peck of pimpled preppers

[WVKayaker]

Wow! Such a lengthy nothing post! You should keep playing with your pigeons, because that list dos not EXCUSE the error of the cult of Roman Catholicism!, but compounds it instead.

It only better confirms the paganism that crept into the early church and takes away from God's plan. As I have always heard, : two wrongs do not make it right!".

[Elsie]

Mary merited NOTHING.

Heretic!

Heretic!!

HERETIC!!!

Oil the rack!

Prepare the oil!!

Open the door to the Iron Maiden!!!

[Elsie]

Extra crispy!

(First; ya need more BATTERING.)

[Elsie]

I post De Montfort quotes to show just how far some Catholics go in their "adoration" of Mary. Most Catholics are not aware that it goes to this level.

SOME are evidently poorly catechized...

 

 

 

Bernadine: ...all gifts, all virtues, and all graces are dispensed by the hands of Mary to whomsoever, when, and as she pleases. O Lady, since thou art the dispenser of all graces, and since the grace of salvation can ONLY come through thy hands, OUR SALVATION DEPENDS ON THEE.

Bonaventure: ...the gates of heaven will open to all who confide in the protection of Mary. Blessed are they who know thee, O Mother of God, for the knowledge of THEE is the high road to everlasting life, and the publication of thy virtues is the way of ETERNAL SALVATION . Give ear, O ye nations; and all you who desire heaven , serve, honor Mary, and certainly you will find ETERNAL LIFE.

Ephem: ...devotion to the divine Mother...is the unlocking of the heavenly Jerusalem.

Blosius: To the, O Lady, are committed the KEYS and the treasures of the kingdom of Heaven.

Ambrose: ...constantly pray 'Open to us, O Mary, the gates of paradise, since thou hast its KEYS.

Fulgetius: ...by Mary God descended from Heaven into the world, that by HER man might ascend from earth to Heaven.

Athanasius: ...And, thou, O Lady, wast filled with grace, that thou mightiest be the way of our SALVATION and the means of ascent to the heavenly Kingdom.

Richard of Laurence: Mary, in fine, is the mistress of heaven; for there she commands as she wills, and ADMITS whom she wills.

Guerric: ...he who serves Mary and for whom she intercedes, is as CERTAIN of heaven as if he were already there... ...and those who DO NOT serve Mary will NOT BE SAVED.

Anselm: It suffices, O Lady, that thou willest it, and our SALVATION is certain.

Antoninus: ...souls protected by Mary, and on which she casts her eyes, are NECESSARILY JUSTIFIED AND SAVED.

[Elsie]

In their mythology, the god Osiris was killed but then raised back to life...

The popular motif of Isis suckling her son Horus, however, lived on in a Christianized context as the popular image of Mary suckling her infant son Jesus from the fifth century onward.^[6]

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis