Posted on 12/16/2007 4:05:55 PM PST by NYer
“No more of an automaton than Eve, who was also created sinless.”
True, but Eve was not “preserved” sinless as the Latins would have it Panagia was.
R, your point, of course, is perfectly patristic. The Most Holy Theotokos is indeed the Second Eve. The IC adds nothing to what The Fathers taught in that regard.
“You know that’s not what I meant! :-P”
Good. Because any more of that and you were going to be sent off to your spiritual father for 10,000 metanoias! :)
K., Catholic theology doesn't claim that the Blessed Mother was incapable of sin. It was indeed "an exercise of her free will in responding to God" and a perfect response to His grace. She was preserved from some of the effects of original sin (concupiscence), making that perfect response easier for her than it is for us. But it was still her response, and there was nothing "automatic" about it.
OTOH, Our Lord is ontologically incapable of sin, because He is God and God cannot be the subject of the verb "to sin", more-or-less by definition.
Thanks!!! Just COMMON SENSE would dictate that the MOTHER of GOD HAD to be SINLESS! It boggles the mind that any reasoning person could think it could just be any old sinner. I hate that the Protestants diss the Saviour’s MOTHER like they do.
Thanks!!! Just COMMON SENSE would dictate that the MOTHER of GOD HAD to be SINLESS! It boggles the mind that any reasoning person could think it could just be any old sinner. I hate that the Protestants diss the Saviour’s MOTHER like they do.
ME TOO!! I’m Catholic....what are you???
I pray for you at Heaven’s Gate when you have to answer for your hard-headedness against His MOTHER.
Thick....it means all, BUT Mary were born with Original Sin and VERY capable of having the Morality of Britney Spears.
My sole rests squarely on Jesus Christ, and his sacrifice for all humanity. I thank you for your prayers, but his highly favored human birth mother has absolutely nothing to do with salvation of any person.
Steady now. It wasn’t that long ago that the doctrine was defined and there was a lot of discussion, centuries of discussion, before any settled agreement arose on the very problem many Protestants not unreasonably pose.
COMMON SENSE.
The pope has in several books, taken pains to advocate the need to go back to the fathers. He also has pointed out that the Judaism of Our Lord time was greatly affected by the Greek-Jew relationship, which was both antagonistic and symbriotic. Josephus is a great if flawed example of a Phrarisee who is hellenized but not. Modernist scholars came up with the idea that the Gospel were produced late in part because they were written in Greek. Since Paul wrote—so as we know exclusively in Greek, and since Acts recounts the squabbling between the Hebrew and the Greek Jews in the Jerusalem, and since all evidence shows that the whole of the Holy land was colonized, with rich Greeks and rich Jews holding estates in the land, why not just assume that the place was bicultural, and likewise the Church. Furthermore, given the proximity of Nazareth of a Greek City, there is no reason to deny emphatically that He spoke Greek, even though his mission was to “Hebrew-speakers.” especially since it is like that his family were among the colonizers from Judah?
Where? I haven't seen any of that stuff in a LONG time!
:-)) <- double chin
OMG!! You ARE joking.....right??? SHe’s the MOTHER of GOD!!! Full of GRACE means SINLESS.
Our Protestant brothers and sisters (for such they are even if they deny it -- or if, as some of us do, we deny it) love the Lord whom we love. They are rightly concerned in placing all their hope in the Salvation IHS wrought and in giving God all the glory.
It is not just their failing but ours as well that we have not made our blessed Mother's case as well or as persuasively as it might be made. It does not honor her -- or, to be practical, increase the chance that they will honor her as we would like -- if yell at them for not seeing the matter as we do.
For me, that God has chosen to share His love for us in so many wonderful ways increases my joy and the thanks I offer Him. A bad argument gets my dander up, as does gratuitously offensive language (unless the argument or language are mine, in which case they are not only understandable but ,of course, meritorious). But when a good, purposeful, devout person rejects what seems to me to be a wonderful and joyous gift of God to his children, when they miss, as it seems to me, such a wonderful instance of "Grace upon grace" or of "shaken down, pressed together, running over" I think the problem is how to be more persuasive, not more emphatic.
It's probably just my problem.
One of my favorite quotes:
“Never apologize for the Blessed Virgin Mary!” ~~Mother Angelica
Again, not tyring to persuade, but rather to clarify.
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.