Posted on 10/07/2002 1:03:41 PM PDT by Polycarp
This is a decent summary from a non-Catholic source:
Current status of Mary:
Although the virgin Mary is rarely mentioned in the Bible, and although Protestant churches consider her to be a relatively minor biblical character, the Roman Catholic Church has long assigned her an elevated status.
The Roman Catholic Church has historically taught two basic dogmas about Mary:
|
1. Mary is the Mother of God. |
|
2. Perpetual Virginity: Mary was a virgin when Yeshua (Jesus) was conceived; this state continued throughout her life. |
Two additional dogmas about Mary were infallibly proclaimed by two popes during the 19th and 20th centuries:
|
3. Immaculate Conception: Pope Pius IX proclaimed the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary on 1854-DEC-8. Many Roman Catholics believe that this refers to Jesus' conception circa 5 to 7 BCE. In fact, it means that Mary herself was conceived free of sin before her birth circa 20 BCE. |
|
4. Assumption of Mary: Pope Pius XII, in his Munificentissimus Deus (1950-NOV-1), defined that Mary, "after the completion of her earthly life was assumed body and soul into the glory of Heaven." That is, she was "taken up body and soul into heaven," at the time of her death. She is there "exalted as Queen of the Universe." 1 |
In addition, various popes and church councils have referred to Mary as co-redemptrix, mediatrix, and advocate:
|
In ancient times:
|
||||||
|
1750: Alphonsus Mary de Liguori, canonized as Saint Alphonsus in 1839, wrote a book "The Glories of Mary." It continues to be published today, under various church imprimaturs. Various chapters in the book are titled: "Mary our Help," "Mary our Mediatress," "Mary our Advocate," etc. 1 | ||||||
|
1935: Pope Pius XI gave the title co-redemptrix to Mary during a radio broadcast. 1 | ||||||
|
Circa 1965: The Chapter 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, passed by the Vatican Council II states, in part:
|
||||||
|
1985: Pope John Paul II recognized Mary as co-redemptrix" during a speech in Guayaquil, Ecuador. He said, in part, "Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity...In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son." 4 | ||||||
|
1987-MAR-25: In his encyclical Redemptoris Mater, Pope John Paul II "referred to Mary as 'Mediatrix' three times, and as 'Advocate' twice." 1 | ||||||
|
1997-APR-9: During an audience Pope John-Paul II referred to the role of Mary during the crucifixion of Jesus: "Mary … co-operated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity...In God’s plan, Mary is the ‘woman’ (cf. John 2:4; John 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs." 1 |
Although Mary has been referred to on numerous occasions as co-redemptrix, mediatrix, and advocate, none have the force of an infallible papal declaration.
Professor Mark Miravalle of Franciscan University in Steubenville, OH, initiated a formal petition drive in 1993 during a Marian conference at that university. It asks the Pope to make infallible statement that would officially elevate Mary, the mother of Jesus, to the status of co-redeemer. More than six million signatures from 148 countries have reached the Vatican as of the end of the year 2000, asking that Pope John Paul II infallibly declare a new dogma: "That the Virgin Mary is a co-redeemer with Jesus and co-operates fully with her son in the redemption of humanity." If this were done, "she would be a vastly more powerful figure, something close to the fourth member of the Holy Trinity and the primary female face through which Christians experience the divine." 3 Miravalle's petition has received support from Mother Theresa, 550 bishops, Cardinal John O'Connor and 41 other cardinals (including at least 12 cardinals in Rome). If the dogma is declared infallibly, it would pronounce Mary as "Co-Redemptrix [co-redeemer], Mediatrix [mediator] of All Graces, and Advocate for the People of God." It would require all Roman Catholics to believe that:
|
Mary is co-redemptrix with Jesus. She participates in people's redemption. |
|
Mary is mediatrix and has the power to grant all graces. |
|
Mary is the advocate for the people of God and has the authority to influence God's judgments. |
If the dogma is infallibly declared, many feel that, in the words of Father Rene Laurentin, it would be the equivalent of launching "bombs" at Protestants. Father Laurentin is a French monk and the world's leading Mary scholar. He believes that: "Mary is the model of our faith but she is not divine. There is no mediation or co-redemption except in Christ. He alone is God." Raising the status of Mary would further acerbate the split between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Ecumenical activity would be negatively affected. There is speculation that a schism might develop over the issue within the Roman Catholic church. There may be a renewed debate over the role of the pope's power in the church. 5,6
Now you know when you start knockin' the noses offen them idols like that the militant ones show up in a blinding, purple rage! LOL
Yeah! And did you hear the latest???
The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a nativity scene in Washington, DC this Christmas.
This isn't for any religious constitutional reason.
They simply have not been able to find three wise men and a virgin in the nation's capitol.
There was no problem however finding enough asses to fill the stable.
There's an old canard about pre-Reformation Catholic Churches chaining Bibles to the pulpit so the hoi poloi couldn't read it on their own. In fact, in medieval times Bibles were chained to pulpits, but the reason was because a hand-copied Bible cost the equivalent of three years wages.
In ancient times converts simply had to memorize things. A convert might know a bunch of prayers like the Apostle's Creed, The Lord's Prayer and the Hail Mary, some scripture passages and some psalms. The Rosary devotion came about out of the desire of average Christians to imitate the monks' divine office. The psalms came to be replaced with "Our Fathers," "Hail Marys" and meditations on significant events in salvation history.
You might want to check out Henry Graham's "Where We Got the Bible."
Where does Jesus tell us to settle our disputes in Scripture?
Where is that in Scripture?
Because the type would be foreshadowing Christ (the Ark) containing Christ (the contents) which I don't see in any sense in the New Testament. Moreover, if anything constructed of precious materials for the glory of God in the OT is a type of Christ, then the tent of the Ark is a type of Christ as would be the Temple. In this case then, Christ (the Temple) would contain Christ (the Ark) which would contain Christ (the contents). I don't see Christ containing Christ containing Christ anywhere in the New Testament.
I see that you're silent on Christ's description of the manna as a type for Himself, the new bread from heaven. (John 6) Do you agree with Jesus' typology regarding the manna?
How would you explain the significance of the Last Supper in light of the fact that Jesus is the eternal High Priest in the order of Melchizedek?
What does Jesus say in Scripture about the gates of hell prevailing against His Church?
That's all very fascinating, but seriously. How could Christians live by the rule of faith, "the Bible alone" when there simply weren't any printed Bibles prior to the invention of the printing press? When Bibles had to be hand-copied and cost the equivalent of three years wages?
Seventeenth Century
Bible alone.
Florida game? Who they playing? Isn't Tennessee is it?
Oh yeah, could you ask Woody and Rnmom who're gonna win? (I think woody admitted to be "ambassador" once, but my memory could be faulty on this.)
In any case, with those two on the board we might as well start pickin' up some cash on the games. It'd be a shame to waste their abilities on useless stuff like what I'm thinking when we could work a neat scam on football scores.
LOL.
I thought we were in agreement on this point.
I can't but help feel a sinister ploy by you - you STILL seem to want to accuse me, and through me all Catholics, of not believing in the Holy Scriptures, albeit, through indirect pithy comments. Let's go back and see...
In Post #574 you wrote at the end of several gratias quotes from St. Paul's 1st Epistle to the Corinthians and St. Peter's (quote: "From YOUR Pope") 1st and 2nd Epistles:
RnMomof7: So yes the Bible has divine authority...you may go read your phone book now for inspiration...( Yes that is deserved sarcasm)
Did I, or any Catholic, ever deny that the Holy Scriptures have Divine Authority? Why would I want to read my phone book for inspiration? Is that an article of Faith in your Church? Am I to take it that you believe that?
I agree with the quotes you gave me, but why do you give them to me to begin with? You seem to imply that I'm unaware of them and don't know that the Holy Spirit is the Author of Holy Scripture. What was this all in response to? Well from my Post #544:
RnMomof7: We have the scripture because of the Holy Spirit
Totus Tuus: Shall I be sarcastic and ask if it fell from Heaven? Trick question: Who wrote the Gospel of St. Matthew? This far in the thread and you still want to pretend that the Catholic Church doesn't believe this when She was the first to proclaim it? C'mon!
Cont.: Of course the Holy Spirit is the principle author of the entire Canon of Holy Scripture. Through Divine Inspiration, God made use of His creatures that He chose, men (and at least one woman known in one instance), respecting and using and "building on" their natural abilities and active compliance in freedom, to write the Scriptures. All this done in the context and for the people in a hierarchical community - first Israel, then bursting to all mankind i.e. Catholic = "according to the all" "universal" Church = "called from". The same Spirit guided the Church to recognize which Books were, and which were not, inspired by Him so that She could infallibly determine the Canon = "rule" "list". He also continues to guide Her in correctly interpreting those same Scriptures. The Church, indeed, venerates them, showing Her dependence on them.
I don't get it. From what above do you feel you needed to give me a lecture in Post #574? Written late at night when I was finishing up at work, I suppose that I was "on edge" because of your Post #533 which was a response to my Post #528. These followed from your Post #326, responding to my Post #319. Ultimately, I think it derived from my Post #296 and Post #218, this one being a response to a response of particularly and outrageously ignorant, bigoted, and anti-Catholic rant "tract", which I would swear had come from Jack Chick(sp?) and his ilk. (I didn't realize then that FR had so many Protestants of the "Calvinist" variety so insecure in their own Faith that they have to attack the Catholic Church with all the ignorance that they can muster - sorta like all the Arab Nations that have to attack Israel to maintain their own "unity". Such is life...)
Anyway, from #296:
RnMomof7: How do you know he is God?
Totus Tuus: By the theological virtue of Divine Faith! This is a supernatural Gift of God which no human being can obtain on his/her own. ...
Then from #319, responding to your Post #314 to Desdemona:
RnMomof7: Where does faith come from?
Totus Tuus: See my post # 296. Divine Faith is a supernatural gift from God!
Then in Post #326, you write: The bible tells us where we get faith from do you know where it is?
If it falls from heaven with no source then do all men have an equal amount of faith? Is all faith equal in effect?
I didn't realize it then, but now I think you were trying to "milk" me (as well as others such as Desdemona) for Romans 10:17. Geez... Question: Why didn't you cut and paste it then and there for civil discussion? Why the prosecutorial tactics as if I'm on the stand? I stick to my answer in Post #296. It is correct Catholic belief in full alignment with St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. I would have been happy to have responded. Quite frankly, it was only later when I was thinking (writing) about Romans in another Post to you, and the "elitist" tone of this short Post in the back of my mind, that it hit me that you were looking for this. For some Protestants, this quote from St. Paul IS the "Bible". I would like to expect more from this Forum on FR. Later in Post #528 I responded:
I think I answered this already in other posts.
Or, on second thought, after typing below, I came back up to answer this because I think I now know the game you are playing. It's a dumb game. Are you taunting me to see if I know where it is in the Bible? Okay, I'm running around in surgery (I see "RN" in your name) and I don't have the Holy Scriptures handy, but...
In Romans, I think, among other things, St. Paul tells us that Faith comes from hearing the word of God preached to us. And that is precisely the reason that He established His One Church on the Twelve Apostles. They were to authoritatively preach the kerygma of the Life, atoning Death, and Ressurrection of Christ. They still do through their successors - something about Christ saying "I am with you always, to the close of the ages".
Also I stated that:
St. Paul says many other things in his Epistles concerning what the Word of God is - including holdings fast to the Traditions handed on to believers, whether written or oral. I don't pretend that you would agree, but I merely state it to show you that Catholics believe that the Word of God is found in the Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. ... Both are the Infallible Word of God and are to be believed by Faith for those who hear. They do not contradict one another nor can they. This teaching has been believed from the beginning of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, notwithstanding ridiculous claims to the contrary, whose belief is historically verifiable. It was not "invented" in the Middle Ages. And it is "biblical". If you don't share this Faith, fine. I cannot judge you.
Also, a little weary of all the smearing going on throughout the thread, a slip of gentle "self" sarcasm:
Besides, I'm a Catholic, and as you and others have pontificated on this thread, I can't possibly know anything about the Bible /sarcasm>. The Catholic Church is the original "Bible" Church is all I can say. We have the Holy Scriptures because of Her.
You know full well that I and the other Catholics here agree with you that the Holy Scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit and is the Word of God. You took the last line "We have the Holy Scriptures because of Her." out of context, in my opinion, to try and "slam" me with it to "tell" me that the Holy Scriptures come from the Holy Spirit. And I would add that the Holy Spirit did it through the Catholic Church, of which He is Her Soul. I have stated this many times on this thread. If you don't agree, so be it.
You also know that I made comments concerning ugliness and sarcasm throughout the whole thread, which you started your Post #533 as interpreting to mean your original questions about Faith above. Could have been an honest mistake, but I don't know that I can think that now.
It was in this context that I wrote in Post #544 (From above, but again, here):
Shall I be sarcastic and ask if it fell from Heaven? Trick question: Who wrote the Gospel of St. Matthew? This far in the thread and you still want to pretend that the Catholic Church doesn't believe this when She was the first to proclaim it? C'mon!
The sarcasm follows your "fishing" expedition concerning Faith: "If it falls from heaven...". My question still stands. Who wrote the Gospel of St. Matthew? Most Christians would naturally say St. Matthew - and would be correct. They would know also that the Holy Spirit is the primary Author. The Holy Spirit wrote the Scriptures through men, and interprets them through the Church. Just as Christ became Man through Mary. Just as Faith in Christ is heard through what is preached. RnMomof7, we DO NOT disagree about the Holy Scriptures being the Divine Word of God, and you've known that all along. Undoubtedly, we INTERPRET them differently, and I believe that there are 7 more Books in the Bible that you don't accept. Why the drama?
WHAT!!! ...It is an INSULT to say we have the word of God because of the Holy Spirit? ..I happen to believe that is TRUE...
OHHH, PLEASE!!!!!! .....whatever... You apparently can dish out sarcasm by the truckloads, but...
Our Posts are probably done. Games like this don't do anything for me. You haven't responded to other points that I've made and just want to preach to me - ABOUT THINGS I ALREADY BELIEVE!
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.
