Posted on 10/08/2007 6:08:42 AM PDT by NYer
Both his writing and his analysis. Lots of supposition and innuendos. Little analysis of the passage.
Also lots of piety and name dropping.
Mary's sinlessness is referred to as her Immaculate Conception (conceived without sin). From Sacred Scripture we have at least two passages of the Bible that present the implicit seed of the revealed truth of Mary's Immaculate Conception.
In Genesis 3:15, after Adam and Eve committed Original Sin, God addresses Satan, who is represented by the serpent: "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed; he (2) shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heel." Since the "seed" of the woman is Jesus Christ, who is to crush Satan victoriously in the Redemption, then the woman must in fact refer to Mary, Mother of the Redeemer.
The word "enmity," which is rich in meaning in this passage, signifies "in opposition to." The enmity established between the "seed" of the woman, which is Jesus, and the "seed" of the serpent, which is sin, and all evil angels and humans, is in absolute and complete opposition, because there is absolute and complete opposition between Jesus and all evil. In other words, the seed of the woman and the seed of Satan have to be in complete and total opposition to each other as depicted in the term "enmity."
Further in the passage we see the identical God-given opposition or enmity given and proclaimed by God between the woman, Mary, and the serpent, Satan. Mary is given the same absolute and perpetual opposition to Satan as Jesus possesses in relation to sin. It is for this reason that Mary could not have received a fallen nature as a result of Original Sin. Any participation in the effects of Original Sin would place the Mother of Jesus in at least partial participation with Satan and sin, thereby destroying the complete God-given opposition as revealed in Genesis 3:15.
The opposition between Jesus and sin is paralleled by the opposition between the woman, Mary, and the serpent, Satan. Again, this tells us that the Mother of Jesus could not participate in the fallen nature of man because that would mean participating, at least partially, in the domain of sin, a reality to which God gave Mary complete opposition.
From the New Testament the principal scriptural seed for the Immaculate Conception is revealed in the inspired words of the Angel Gabriel, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Lk 1:28). In the angelic greeting, Mary's name is nowhere used. Rather, the title "full of grace" is used as a substitute for Mary's name by the angelic messenger of God. These angelic words refer to a fullness of grace, a plentitude of grace that is part of Mary's very nature. So much is Mary's very being full of grace that this title serves to identify Mary in place of her own name. It is also true that no person with a fallen nature could possess a fullness of grace, a plentitude of grace, appropriate only for the woman who was to give God the Son an identical, immaculate human nature. Mary was conceived in providence to be the woman who would give her same immaculate nature to God when God became man. Certainly we can see the fittingness in God receiving a human nature from a human mother, and receiving an immaculate nature from a truly immaculate mother.
In the Greek text of Luke 1:28, we have an additional implicit reference to Mary's Immaculate Conception taking place before the announcement of the Angel. The Greek word "kecharitomene," is a perfect participle, which, in Greek, denotes an action completed in the past but still holding a relevance to the present. Therefore we translate Luke 1:28 most accurately in this way, "Hail, you who have been graced" or "Hail, you who have been perfected in grace." The Greek translation of the angel's greeting refers to an event of profound grace experienced by Mary that was already completed in the past. (3)
These implicitly revealed seeds of the Immaculate Conception blossomed gradually but steadily in the Tradition of the Church. The early Church Fathers refer to Mary under such titles as "all holy," "all pure," "most innocent," "a miracle of grace," "purer than the angels," "altogether without sin," and these within the first three centuries of the Church. Since the word "immaculate" means "without sin," then the titles used for Mary by the early Fathers, such as "altogether without sin," certainly contain the understanding of her immaculate nature.
The early Church Fathers also compared the Mother of God's sinless state as being identical to Eve's state before the participation of Eve in Original Sin. Mary as the "New Eve" was seen to be in the same state of original grace and justice that Eve was in when she was created by God. Since Eve was obviously conceived in grace, without the fallen nature that we receive due to Original Sin, the parallel made by the Church Fathers between Mary and Eve before the fall illustrates their understanding of Mary's likewise immaculate nature.
In the words of St. Ephraem (d.373): "Those two innocent...women, Mary and Eve, had been (created) utterly equal, but afterwards one became the cause of our death, the other the cause of our life." We can see the complete parallel between the sinless Eve before the fall and the sinless Mary. St. Ephraem also refers to Mary's sinless nature in this address to Our Lord: "You and your Mother are the only ones who are immune from all stain; for there is no spot in Thee, O Lord, nor any taint in Your Mother."
No one's missing this, least of all God in heaven. He has told us not to bow down to anything other than Him, regardless of what it is we're bowing to.
So we are not to venerate, worship, adore, sacrifice to, pray to or expect absolution for our sins from anyone other than the Triune God.
This always seemed to me to be one of the easy rules to understand in Christianity, and thus it is so amazing the RCC gets it so very wrong.
Please read the following from Acts 17 and recognize the similar error propagated by the RCC... And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is? For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean. (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.) [I love that line] Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." -- Acts 17:18-31"Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him (Paul). And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.
The Athenians thought their god was worthy of worship, but as Paul instructed them, unless they NAMED the object of their devotion as JESUS CHRIST, their worship was worthless.
Actually, less than worthless, since their prayers was truly offensive to God who no longer winks at this error, but demands repentance from it.
This is why Protestants cringe at statues of silver and gold, and Mary as co-redeemer, and men who kneel to the stock of a tree, regardless of protests that its made of the finest-quality maple or oak.
Thanks, but have already been thru that stuff...
Thanks for taking the time to present your thoughts.
You note two verses of Scripture as the foundation for your belief that Mary is outside human condemnation following the fall, ie., immaculately conceived, Gen.3:15 and Luke 1:28. Are there any other verses that are more definitive? Also, how can you reconcile this sinless state with her death. Aren't the wages of sin death?
The early Church Fathers refer to Mary under such titles as "all holy," "all pure," "most innocent," "a miracle of grace," "purer than the angels," "altogether without sin," and these within the first three centuries of the Church.
How do you know they got it right?
Do you drop to your knees and pray to Abe in front of the Lincoln monument???
Not surprising, you're continuing to bring this up, when it is a misrepresentation, and, more importantly, the title of "Co-Redemptrix" ISN'T EVEN CATHOLIC DOGMA!
Typical hyperbole.
Close enough.
Do you honestly think God is fooled by the syntax or grammar or spelling of however you care to wrap up this foul error?
The words "dear Coredemptrix" express most exactly soteriological value of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s maternal mission in the tones of a pure theologia cordis. She coredeemed humanity by offering the divine Victim, her Son Jesus, in the bloody immolation of the Cross, and co-immolating herself with Him in order to "restore supernatural life to souls" (LG 61), became in this way our "Mother in the order of grace" (LG 1.c.) (18). She "gave birth to us in sorrows," affirms St. Pio. She is, therefore, the Mother Coredemptrix. She desires to raise her children and, what is more, to make them grow even unto the stature of Christ. She is, therefore, the Mother Mediatrix and Dispensatrix of all graces (19), always "associated with Jesus in applying the fruits of the Redemption to souls," as Fr. Melchior da Pobladura writes (20). The Coredemptrix reacquired the grace lost. The Mediatrix distributes the grace reacquired. There is an operative continuity between the Coredemption and Distribution of saving grace. And, according to the teaching of St. Pio of Pietrelcina, we should be eternally grateful to "our dear Coredemptrix" and to our "Mediatrix and Dispensatrix of all graces."
"Dispensatrix of all graces."
Let that sink in -- Mary dispenses all Grace.
Blasphemy and lies. Repent of it.
That being said, the concept of Mediatrix of all graces is not a denial that God dispenses graces through other means. To do so would be an error. Rather, it is an affirmation that through her intercession, her prayer at the throne of her Son, Jesus Christ, she can obtain all things. God is the one who does the "heavy lifting." Then again, since your heretical theology denies the intercession of the saints, you will not be convinced by this.
Obviously many of them didn't. They were dealing with heresies coming from all sides, and so some of them incorporated the female pagan rituals into these inflated descriptions of Mary.
Isis and Cybele became Mary.
Where is the Scriptural evidence that Mary intercedes for anyone?
Heresy is defined as something contradicted by Scripture and expressly forbidden by God.
Labeling Mary as "co-redemtrix" and "co-dispenser of grace" are heresies men will be called upon to defend before Jesus Christ.
And they will fail.
Amen. Mary was blessed (one syllable, not two.)
That's your Protestant/"Reformist" definition, and I do not accept it.
It will interesting to see the Jesuits trying to argue with God Himself!
What about the Sabbatine Privilege?? That's that Catholic Dogma, isn't it??? How is that any different from being a co-Redemptrix???
That was a very good book to read. I highly recommend it, FWIW.
Now, I'm still having trouble figuring out "unanimous consent", so be patient. What is Sabbatine Privilege?
PYRO: That's your Protestant/"Reformist" definition, and I do not accept it.
Then that must explain why you don't seem to worry about God's admonition against falling down to the stock of a tree.
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.