Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: unlearner
To the remainder of your post.

There are no scriptures that even hint that she remained a virgin.

The scripture is silent on whether she did. "Brothers" are used loosely throughout the scripture (like with anything I say, if you want to drill to the specifics I am ready). Matthew 1:25 does not say anything about their relations after the birth of Jesus. The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary comes from the Holy Tradition -- after all, people were alive who knew her personally enough to pass on the knowledge that she never remarried and had no other children. There are also powerful arguments from reason, -- if you want to go into them just ask. The issue is, there is no contradiction that you can find in the scripture to the doctrine.

The Word of God takes precedence over other authoritative sources of truth

Where the Holy Scripture allows for several interpretations, or where it is silent, the Holy Tradition of the Church dictates the truth. Your quotes to not controvert that. There are plenty of verses that praise the scripture, call it inspired by God, suggest that we study it and argue based on it, explain that it is given for all eternity, etc. but there is no verse that says what you imply: that the scripture is perspicuous or alone sufficient for all spiritual matters, or overrides legitimate authority of the Church.

The supremacy of Christ is essential

No one said anything against the supremacy of Christ. You are, agian, arguing against a straw argument.

In elevating the role of Mary beyond what the Bible says, this doctrine fails to measure up to the standard of searching scripture to see if these things are so.

First, the Bible says a whole lot about her, including her veneration being approved and expanded to all saints by Christ (Luke 11:27-28). Second, no, if the sripture does not contradict something and the Church offers it for the benefit of the faithful, then by definition searching the scripture is not any kind of standard -- you cannot search for what is not there.

The intimacy of spiritual union with Christ is greater than the physical union of Mary or anyone else who knew Christ during His first advent

You know that how? It is not the point anyway: the point is that Christ chose to redeem us through His incarnation, and to be a baby born of the particular woman. If that woman were inimportant, she would not be named, her words would not be recorded, her presence at the foot of the Cross and her adoption of the disciple, her presence at Pentecost -- would not be necessary to record.

It is possible for churches to sin and err

The Church is a body of Christ, so no. It is possible for individual clergy to sin and err, yes. This is why we have confessions for them as well, as well as the apparatus of the clergy to communicate with us as necessary.

113 posted on 05/14/2008 2:54:06 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: annalex

“Matthew 1:25 does not say anything about their relations after the birth of Jesus. “

What it says is that Mary and Joseph did not have marital relations before Christ was born. To expand this to include the remainder of her natural life is more than idle speculation, it is adding to scripture.

Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure;
He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
Do not add to His words,
Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

I will not post the entire contents of 2 Peter 1 which clarifies the role of scripture, but I will summarize certain major points. Peter’s conclusion of this chapter says that scriptural revelation is never of a private interpretation. He leads up to this point with an illustration. He follows the point with an explanation.

An example of a private interpretation would be cunningly devised fables (such as the unnecessary addition to the Biblical account you are advocating). Rather than being invented fables, the apostles were eyewitnesses of real events. And their experiences were openly proclaimed, not passed on in secret or hidden in parables. The meaning (i.e. interpretation) was declared plainly, and openly, i.e. not limited to a special class of privileged followers as the Gnostics claimed.

The thrust of this chapter can be summed in a few points. First, the recipients of Peter’s letter had EVERYTHING they needed for life and godliness, by knowing the Lord:

2 Peter 1:3
as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue,

Secondly, Peter saw the need to write down the knowledge that had been verbally passed to these early believers so as to have a permanent written record after Peter’s death (which Christ had foretold).

Third, as I already pointed out, this knowledge of Christ, verbally shared by Peter, and now recorded for us here, is public rather than private information.

While I agree that the scriptures are silent on many things, understood in the proper context, this does not imply any insufficiency with regard to the knowledge needed for the Christian life and godliness which is found solely in the revealed knowledge of the Lord according to Peter.

Paul concurs by asserting the sufficiency of scripture to completely supply our needs for every good work.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

“If that woman were inimportant, she would not be named, her words would not be recorded, her presence at the foot of the Cross and her adoption of the disciple, her presence at Pentecost — would not be necessary to record.”

We agree that Mary was an important person written about in the Bible. This does not justify an imbalanced, over-emphasis on her role nor the practices of praying to her or her images.

“First, the Bible says a whole lot about her, including her veneration being approved and expanded to all saints by Christ (Luke 11:27-28).

This passage says nothing of the sort:

And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!” But He said, “More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

The blessing on Mary is not denied by this passage or by me. Yet Jesus here says, in contrast with the statement, there is a greater blessing to be had by keeping God’s Word. I cannot for the life of me imagine how you support your claim pertaining Mary using this passage.

Mary is an important figure in the Bible. God has provided many significant details about many lives in the Bible. Many things are left out. While historical facts, learning more about the language used, learning facts about the times, places, etc. of the writings, are all helpful to the goal of meditating on scripture, they must not be exalted above measure. Every mountain is brought low in the presence of Christ Who is central to the meaning of all scriptures.

Look at John the Baptist. He was greater than Mary in their role of introducing Christ to the world. Mary gave birth to Him and nurtured him, but it was John who proclaimed Him to the world. According to Christ, no one (to that point) was greater of those born to women (Mary was born to a woman) than John:

Matthew 11:11
Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Yet, look at what John says about his own ministry:

John 3:30-31
He must increase, but I must decrease. He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all.

While we can benefit from learning what the scriptures say about John and Mary, they only serve to draw our focus to the One Who is above all - Christ Jesus.

“The Church is a body of Christ, so no. It is possible for individual clergy to sin and err, yes. “

You are failing to discern the body of Christ. The body is made up of parts or “members”. If my right hand steals, my left hand must also go to jail. The Bible says clearly that believers are members of Christ’s body, and each is affected by the weaknesses, sufferings and sins of other members:

1 Corinthians 12:12-27
For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. For in fact the body is not one member but many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. And if they were all one member, where would the body be?
But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary. And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.

And in the Apocalypse, Christ repeatedly told churches to repent.

Churches do sin when their members sin.


165 posted on 05/15/2008 11:31:13 AM PDT by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson