Biblical Mary

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Bruce Atkinson

Active Member
Sep 25, 2021
113
66
28
76
Western MA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It is not obvious that they are Mary's children. By claiming that they are when the Bible does not say that Mary had other children you are the one adding to it
You have totally ignored the evidence I gave you.
Therefore there is no point in continuing this conversation.

Apparently, you don't fully believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Here's #1511 for you -

1511 The Church believes and confesses that among the seven sacraments there is one especially intended to strengthen those who are being tried by illness, the Anointing of the Sick:

This sacred anointing of the sick was instituted by Christ our Lord as a true and proper sacrament of the New Testament. It is alluded to indeed by Mark, but is recommended to the faithful and promulgated by James the apostle and brother of the Lord


What part of "James the apostle and brother of the Lord" don't you understand? It is not referring to two different people, only James.
 

Bruce Atkinson

Active Member
Sep 25, 2021
113
66
28
76
Western MA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus saves us in two way to forgive our past sins and he also preserves us from committing future sins

Mary was preserved from all sin

conceived and created immaculate
Gen 3:15 enmity with Satan
Lk 1:28 full of grace
Rev 12:1 clothed with the sun immaculate purity

Heb 4:16 throne of grace

Why is it that Mary's immaculate conception, sinless her entire life, and full of grace is found ONLY in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Bible versions based on the Latin Fulgate, itself a creation of the Roman Catholic Church? How could the other Bible translations POSSIBLY MISS those seemingly important facts in their translations from presumably the same very small numbers (2-3?) of source texts (ie, same scripture (books) found in different locations). I would have to conclude that all three aspects about her listed as well as other aspects enumerated in this thread are manufactured by the Roman Catholic Church.

Regarding Genesis 3:15 - 'enmity' is another word for enemy. We are ALL enemies of Satan as we hate sin! Genesis 3:15 points to the fact that the offspring of Eve, Mary, will give birth to Satans' eternal enemy and victor over sin and death, Jesus. So there is a special hatred between Satan and Eve as a result.

I've addressed 'full of grace' in posts #1660 and #1750 previously. I noted that Wycliffe translation you are using uses 'full of grace' in Luke 1:28. Again, how is it that all non-RCC-based Bible versions missed THAT as well?

Regarding Revelation 12:1 - I'll repeat that the woman all through Revelation refers to Israel, NOT Mary. Otherwise, when and how did Mary become clothed by the sun, the moon under her feet, and 12 crowns? I can't find anywhere in scripture OR the Catechism that states Mary has any of these attributes! Perhaps you could enlighten us? And the reference in 12:2 that she is being with child? Israel will become the promised KINGDOM after the tribulation. Her being 'with child' is an indication of the coming Messiah coming from heaven (Zechariah 14:4) and His KINGDOM.

Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. (KJV)

And Hebrews 4:16 - Apparently you've confused a letter to Israel and something about Mary. Note that 'fathers' below indicates those born in the line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, ie, Jews only.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, (KJV)

Trying to replace Jesus in Hebrews 4:14-16 with Mary is completely wrong. All of Hebrews is written to show the unbelieving people of Israel that Jesus is the promised Messiah, eg, the Christ.

Heb 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Heb 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. (KJV)
 
Last edited:

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,759
3,786
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So you claim


And so it is! I even gave you Catholic sites knowna nd approved by the Vatican that call Mary co-redemptrix and co-mediatrix. YOu just refuse to accept them. The current Pope is not a bigf Maryist so we see little with Him extolling Mary.

As mentioned above, Pius XI and John Paul II referred to Mary as “co-redemptrix” in public settings, but other recent popes have not. Pope Pius XII referred to Mary as “co-redemptrix” during a Holy Hour at Lourdes in 1935, but he never used the title publicly during his pontificate.
Pope Francis and Mary Co-Redemptrix - Where Peter Is
wherepeteris.com/pope-francis-and-mary-co-redemptrix/

Pope Francis rejects Marian title of Co-Redemptrix, says ...
Pope Francis’ 2018 Christmas address to the Roman Curia - LifeSite..

Popes of the Marian Age and Mary Co-redemptrix
Popes of the Marian Age and Mary Co-redemptrix (motherofallpeoples.com)


Building upon the Scriptural and Traditional bedrock of over eighteen centuries of the story of the Co-redemptrix, the Vicars of Christ become the main impetuses for the complete development of this doctrine. The nineteenth and twentieth century papal pronouncements bring the doctrine, and eventually the title, to the ranks of the ordinary teaching of the Church’s Magisterium—guided by the Holy Spirit and exercising the Petrine authority they alone possess.



So great is the Church’s love of the Mother of God, so forthright is its articulation of the truth about her during this period, that it has been universally designated as the “Age of Mary.” Generally dated from the 1830 “Miraculous Medal” apparitions of Our Lady of Grace to St. Catherine Labouré and extending to our own present day, this remarkable period of Church history has seen the declaration of two Marian dogmas, an explosion of Marian life, literature, art, and devotion, and has experienced exponentially more ecclesiastically approved Marian apparitions than at any other period in the Church’s history. It should not be surprising, therefore, to observe the remarkable Mariological development of doctrine and devotion to their Co-redemptive Mother taught by the Holy Fathers of the Marian Age.



This brings us to the question of what, precisely, constitutes the papal teaching of the ordinary Magisterium, the Church’s authoritative teaching office?



The Second Vatican Council instructs us that a “loyal submission of will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra (1) This supreme teaching authority is “made known principally either by the character of the documents in question, or by the frequency with which a certain document is proposed, or by the manner in which a certain document is formulated” (Lumen Gentium, 25).



As we shall see, the “character” of the papal documents which articulate the doctrine of Mary Co-redemptrix include encyclical letters, the official channel of communication for the ordinary Magisterium, as well as other forms of papal teachings such as apostolic letters, exhortations and general addresses (as well as the later ecumenical conciliar teachings of the Second Vatican Council). The truth of Mary Co-redemptrix has also been confirmed by the “frequency” of papal teaching of the Coredemption doctrine (2) and a repeated papal use of the Co-redemptrix title. (3) In fact, all the conciliar criteria for the ordinary teachings of the papal Magisterium are fulfilled by the nineteenth and twentieth century successors of Peter regarding Marian Coredemption and its title. (4)



It is of little wonder, therefore, that during this Marian Age, the Holy Fathers would bring greater precision and authoritative status to the story of Mary Co-redemptrix through their unprecedented papal testimony. (5) Building upon the scriptural, apostolic, patristic, and medieval theological foundations, they have validated its most prominent elements with a pneumatological guidance and protection possessed by no other teaching office on earth.



Remembering the principle that before the title there must first be the role, we see this rule of priority pedagogically respected by the pontiffs, who begin by examining the role of Marian Coredemption and then the role’s expression in the actual Co-redemptrix title.



In his Apostolic Letter, Ineffabilis Deus, which defined the Immaculate Conception (1854), Blessed Pius IX makes reference to the Mother’s Coredemption by recalling the early medieval declaration of her as the “Reparatrix of her first parents” and its scriptural origins in the Genesis 3:15 prophecy of her coredemptive battle with the Serpent: “Also did they declare that the most glorious Virgin was the Reparatrix of her first parents, the giver of life to posterity, that she was chosen before the ages, prepared for Himself by the Most High, foretold by God when he said to the Serpent, ‘I will put enmities between you and the woman’—an unmistakable evidence that she has crushed the poisonous head of the Serpent” (Bl. Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus,Dec. 8, 1854).



In his encyclical, Jucunda Semper, Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) teaches that Mary shared with Jesus the painful atonement on behalf of the human race in the depths of her soul: “When Mary offered herself completely to God together with her Son in the temple, she was already sharing with Him the painful atonement on behalf of the human race… (at the foot of the cross) she willingly offered Him up to divine justice, dying with Him in her heart, pierced by the sword of sorrow.” (6)



The “Rosary Pope” of the nineteenth century also began a series of successive papal teachings which identify the Mother of the Lord as a “cooperatrix” (“co-operare,” to work with) in the distribution of the graces of Redemption as a direct result of her cooperation in the obtaining of the graces of Redemption: “She who had been the cooperatrix in the sacrament of man’s Redemption, would be likewise the cooperatrix in the dispensation of graces deriving from it.” (7) Again, Our Lady is Mediatrix of all graces because she is first the Co-redemptrix; there is acquisition of grace before its distribution. The “Mother suffering” becomes the “Mother nourishing.”



St. Pius X (1903-1914) carries on the papal tribute to Marian Coredemption in his first Marian encyclical, Ad Diem Illum (1904). In this famous text, the Pope of the Eucharist gives papal authority to the many previous theological testimonies to Mary’s share in the merits of Redemption in light of her joint suffering with the Redeemer:



Owing to the union of suffering and purpose existing between Christ and Mary, she merited to become most worthily the reparatrix of the lost world, and for this reason, the dispenser of all the favors which Jesus acquired for us by His death and His blood…. Nevertheless, because she surpasses all in holiness and in union with Christ, and because she was chosen by Christ to be His partner in the work of human salvation, she merits for us de congruo, as they say, that which Christ merited for us de condigno, and she is the principal dispenser of the graces to be distributed. (8)



In its traditional understanding, condign merit in its strict sense (meritum de condigno ex toto rigore justitiae) refers to a merit or “right to a reward” with an equality between the meritorious work and the reward, and also an equality between the person giving the reward and the person receiving the reward. Congruous merit (meritum de congruo) refers to a reward based both on the fittingness of a recompense for the act, and on the generosity of the one giving the reward.



The Catholic Catechism teaches that supernatural merit is both a gift of grace and a reward for man’s co-working with God, which is founded upon God’s free choice to associate man with his salvific work:



With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.



The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man’s free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man’s merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit. (9)



Who, then, is more deserving of God’s merit for collaborating in the work of salvation with Christ than the Mother Co-redemptrix? No other creature, human or angelic, chose to co-work with God in the redemptive plan more than the Immaculata, created full of grace and without sin by the Father of all mankind precisely for this very purpose.










Part 1.




Romanism has clearly declared Mary as co-redemptrix and participated in the atonement by her own suffering! To deny it is to lie to yourself.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,759
3,786
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Catholicism calling Mary co-redemptrix Part 2:



St. Pius X validates on the authoritative level of the ordinary Magisterium that Mary merits for humanity in the order of “fittingness” or congruous merit, that which Jesus merits for us in the order of “justice” or strict condign merit. The Mother at Calvary obtains merit for humanity at least de congruo, (10) based on the appropriateness of recompense for her joint suffering with Jesus, coupled with the generosity of the Eternal Father for the Virgin Daughter’s sacrifice of love and obedience offered to Him for the world’s salvation.



The Magisterium’s Use of the Co-redemptrix Title



The first usages of the Co-redemptrix title in the official pronouncements of the Roman Congregations also take place under the Magisterium of St. Pius X. Co-redemptrix is used three times by the Holy See in the initiatives of three Congregations of the Curia, and is thus contained in the publication of their official acts, Acta Sanctae Sedis (later to become Acta Apostolicae Sedis).



The first official use of Co-redemptrix comes on May 13, 1908, in a document by the Congregation of Rites. In positive response to a petition to raise the rank of the feast of the Seven Sorrows of Mary to a double rite of second class for the universal Church, the Congregation of Rites expresses its hope that “the devotion of the Sorrowful Mother may increase and the piety of the faithful and their gratitude toward the merciful Co-redemptrix of the human race may intensify.” (11)



The Congregation of the Holy Office (currently, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) is the next congregation to use the term. On June 26, 1913, expressing the Congregation’s satisfaction in adding the name of Mary to the name of Jesus in the indulgenced greeting, “Praised be Jesus and Mary” which is then responded to, “Now and forever,” the official document signed by Cardinal Rampolla states: “There are those Christians whose devotion to the most favored among virgins is so tender as to be unable to recall the name of Jesus without the accompanying name of the Mother, our Co-redemptrix, the Blessed Virgin Mary.” (12)



Six months later, the same Holy Office grants a partial indulgence for the recitation of a prayer of reparation to the Blessed Virgin (Vergine benedetta). The prayers ends with the words: “I bless thy holy Name, I praise thine exalted privilege of being truly Mother of God, ever Virgin, conceived without stain of sin, Co-redemptrix of the human race.” (13)



In these instances, the Holy Office which is commissioned by the Church as the guardian of doctrinal orthodoxy, freely uses the Co-redemptrix term in a complementary reference to the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, which manifests its sense of familiarity with and confidence in the term itself. The same Dicastery then grants indulgenced graces to a prayer that identifies the role of Mary, Co-redemptrix of the human race, as a privilege worthy of blessing. The use of the title by the Congregation of Rites (currently the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments) also speaks to the appropriateness of the title as part of authentic Catholic devotion.



It is, moreover, under the pontificate of St. Pius X that the First International Mariological Congress takes place in Rome in 1904 (in celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception), where the theme of Mary Co-redemptrix dominates the Congress. The French theologian (later Cardinal) Alexis Lépicier († 1936) presents a paper which is soon published as a book entitled, The Immaculate Mother of God, Co-redemptrix of the Human Race. (14) In the text, Lépicier states that after the Mother of God, the title of Co-redemptrix is the most glorious that can be granted to the Virgin. Lépicier’s contribution is favorably received by numerous theologians and Mariologists at the Rome congress. (15)



The following pontiff, Benedict XV (1914-1922) provides an invaluable contribution to the exactness of the doctrine of Coredemption as the unequivocal teaching of the papal Magisterium. In his classic text from the Apostolic Letter, Inter Sodalicia (1918) Pope Benedict articulates the Mother’s co-suffering participation in the Passion, her immolation of her Son in appeasement of the Father’s justice, and concludes with the explicit papal teaching that Mary “redeemed the human race together with Christ”: “To such extent did (Mary) suffer and almost die with her suffering and dying Son; to such extent did she surrender her maternal rights over her Son for man’s salvation, and immolated Him—insofar as she could—in order to appease the justice of God, that we rightly say she redeemed the human race together with Christ.” (16)



Upon the shoulders of these pontiffs and their official teachings on Coredemption, Pope Pius XI (1922-1939) becomes the first pontiff to use the title of Co-redemptrix in papal addresses.



The first occasion is on November 30, 1933, in a papal allocution to the pilgrims of Vicenza, Italy. Pastorally sensitive as well as doctrinally sound, Pius XI explains in this first papal usage of “Co-redemptrix” precisely why it is a legitimate term under which to invoke the Mother of the Redeemer: “By necessity, the Redeemer could not but associate (Italian, non poteva, per necessità di cose, non associare) his Mother in his work. For this reason we invoke her under the title of Coredemptrix. She gave us the Savior, she accompanied Him in the work of Redemption as far as the Cross itself, sharing with Him the sorrows of the agony and of the death in which Jesus consummated the Redemption of mankind.” (17)



In this simple passage, Pope Pius XI gives the rationale for the Co-redemptrix title, in light of how the Redeemer could not “not” have associated his Mother within God’s perfect providence in Redemption. (18)



During the 1934 Holy Year of Redemption, Pius XI repeats the Co-redemptrix title during the Lenten commemoration of Our Lady of Sorrows. L’Osservatore Romano reports the pontiff’s remarks to Spanish pilgrims on that occasion: The Pope notes with joy that they have come to Rome to celebrate with him “not only the nineteenth centenary of the divine Redemption, but also the nineteenth centenary of Mary, the centenary of her Coredemption, of her universal maternity.” (19) The Holy Father then exhorts the youth to: “follow the way of thinking and the desire of Mary most holy, who is our Mother and our Coredemptrix: they, too, must make a great effort to be coredeemers and apostles, according to the spirit of Catholic Action, which is precisely the cooperation of the laity in the hierarchical apostolate of the Church.” (20)



In the following year, Pius XI for a third time invokes the Mother of Jesus as the Co-redemptrix in a radio broadcast, which the pontiff knew would reach far beyond the limits of a smaller papal audience in Rome, which would “carry weight and of universal outreach.” (21) In his April 28, 1935 Radio Message for the closing of the Holy Year at Lourdes, Pius XI directly invokes the Mother as the “Co-redemptrix” who assisted the Lord in the offering of the “sacrifice of our Redemption”: “O Mother of love and mercy who, when thy sweetest Son was consummating the Redemption of the human race on the altar of the cross, didst stand next to Him, suffering with Him as Coredemptrix… preserve in us, we beseech thee, and increase day by day the precious fruit of His redemption and thy compassion.” (22)



Pope Pius XII (1939-1958) does not explicitly use the title, but repeatedly elucidates Coredemption’s doctrinal teaching on the level of the ordinary Magisterium. In his encyclical, Mystici Corporis (1943), he states that the ancient New Eve doctrine is properly fulfilled by Mary’s Coredemption at Calvary, and that Mary as the “New Eve” offers Jesus to the Eternal Father, sacrificing with him on behalf of “all the children of Adam”: “It was she who, always most intimately united with her Son, like a New Eve, offered Him up on Golgotha to the Eternal Father, together with the sacrifice of her maternal rights and love, on behalf of all the children of Adam, stained by the latter’s shameful fall.” (23)
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,759
3,786
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In your personal and fallible opinion

As well as hundreds of millions of other Christians as well as the word of God.

Bible shows she had sex and had at least 6 other children after jesus. You and thee fatihi and BOL have to resort to the most vapid word games and obscure types of defense as to be laughable.

but as for worshipping Mary? The only difference with Romanistsa is a word! You kneel, bow, pray to, dedicate your communion, parade the host in a monstance, fast, sing songs, and dedicate churches, bascilicas, days feast days days of obligation to Mary.

If a heathen did all that to their pagan gods, you would say they are worshipping! Or lie to try to protect yourself.

Bishop Alphonse de Ligouri is more responsible than any other for promoting the worship of Mary, therefore dethroning Christ and enthroning Mary in the hearts of the people. Rather than excommunicating him for his heresies, the Catholic Church canonized him as a saint and published his book, called "The Glories of Mary," which is famous, influential, and widely read. He noted that Mary was given rulership over one half of the kingdom of God and rules over the kingdom of mercy while Jesus rules over the kingdom of justice.

He was never denounced as teaching heresy here.

Do Roman Catholics worship Mary?
While all Roman Catholics do not necessarily worship Mary, the fact that many pray to Mary (which is an act of worship and no where justified in Scripture) and give her titles which resemble those given to Jesus Christ including the idea of mediatorship, this question and others related to Mary have been included under this heading.
Should we worship Mary? | Bible.org
upload_2021-10-12_14-30-38.png
bible.org/question/should-we-worship-mary

I know that in official language they do not call it worship, but all the acts, practices, adoration bowing, praying, devotion is worship.

Like Pres. Bush said: If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I did not get your answer to my question regarding the election of the Pope.

“Do you believe that they are infallible in their election of one of them as the Pope. That their election of one to be Pope, is whom the Holy Spirit choose to be Pope? So that whoever is elected have the approval of God?”
I don’t know
I would think them motivated by the Holy Spirit but not sure about infallible


<<<the CCC is in doubt the old catechisms are trustworthy in my opinion >>>

Are you saying, in your opinion, the old CCC have errors, or have some false teachings?

Please clarify. Thanks.

the old are good the new one called the ccc is in doubt

the catechism of the council of Trent
The catechism of Pius x
And radio replies are trustworthy

<<<papal infallibility only applies to the teaching of the pope on matters of faith and morals….>>>

I see. So infallibility only applies to the Pope, in his teachings on the matter of faith and morals.

Are the Pope’s teachings on the matter of faith and morals then becomes RCC official doctrines, since the Pope is infallible with respect to that?

If it is officially defined doctrine like the immaculate conception 1854 or the assumption 1950

By the way, rare as you say that may be, it follows that there is at least an instance, maybe two, three, or more, over thousand of years of Papal history, right? Can you cite some, where the Pope invoked apostolic authority to the universal church and what he taught?

Thanks.

Tong
R4665
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You already said those things in your other posts.

Can you tell me your answers to the questions in my post that you quoted and responded?

Thanks.

Additionally,

<<<conceived and created immaculate>>>

Scriptures please.

If Mary was conceived immaculate, what can you say of her mother and father?

Tong
R4666

it was a natural conception of her parents
In the first moment of her existence God created her without original sin
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Everything since 1958 is in doubt in
“my opinion”
A valid catechism cannot be promulgated without the authority of a valid pope

so go with the trustworthy catechism of the council of Trent, no ecumenism or religious liberty or religious indifferentism there, I can answer that in one word, “TRADITION”!
 

Bruce Atkinson

Active Member
Sep 25, 2021
113
66
28
76
Western MA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
it was a natural conception of her parents
In the first moment of her existence God created her without original sin

Aren't you contradicting yourself in those two statements. 'Natural conception' is when the sperm enters the egg. Also, it's only the Catechism of the Catholic Church that claims Mary was sinless, and even goes so far as stating Mary was created by immaculate conception (CCC #491 & #961), thereby 'elevating' her to the level of Jesus Christ alone.

If Mary was so important in the Bible, why is the only reference to her, and VERY indirectly, Genesis 3:15 (about 50 generations descended from Eve), and specifically in Isaiah 7:14 prophesy showing Jesus would be born of a virgin. It's been repeated by a number of bible scholars I've heard and read that Jesus is on every page of the Bible. It would certainly seem so. There are 54 references to -anyone- named Mary in the Bible and all but 3 are in the 4 Gospels. There's 942 references to Jesus in the New Testament.

Searching the Catechism, there's 197 references to Mary, 893 to Jesus, 182 to Jesus Christ (part of the 893), and 2616 references to Christ.

Let's see now...WHO is by far the most important person in the Bible and the Catechism? Could it be JESUS?

What one believes by faith alone is the sole determination of where one will spend eternity. Choose wisely.
 

theefaith

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
20,070
1,354
113
63
Dallas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Aren't you contradicting yourself in those two statements. 'Natural conception' is when the sperm enters the egg. Also, it's only the Catechism of the Catholic Church that claims Mary was sinless, and even goes so far as stating Mary was created by immaculate conception (CCC #491 & #961), thereby 'elevating' her to the level of Jesus Christ alone.

The immaculate conception refers to her soul being created by God immaculate

If Mary was so important in the Bible, why is the only reference to her, and VERY indirectly, Genesis 3:15 (about 50 generations descended from Eve), and specifically in Isaiah 7:14 prophesy showing Jesus would be born of a virgin. It's been repeated by a number of bible scholars I've heard and read that Jesus is on every page of the Bible. It would certainly seem so. There are 54 references to -anyone- named Mary in the Bible and all but 3 are in the 4 Gospels. There's 942 references to Jesus in the New Testament.

Jesus is God
Messiah
Savior
Mediator
King
Etc. Duh!

Searching the Catechism, there's 197 references to Mary, 893 to Jesus, 182 to Jesus Christ (part of the 893), and 2616 references to Christ.

Let's see now...WHO is by far the most important person in the Bible and the Catechism? Could it be JESUS?

but of course and what we say of Mary refers to Jesus! Only God can have a virgin-mother

What one believes by faith alone is the sole determination of where one will spend eternity. Choose wisely.

what? It’s not a bible study but a covenant and there are requirements
Faith and the sacraments
Mk 16:16 acts 2:38-39 ez 36:25-27
Acts 8:36-38
 

GRACE ambassador

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2021
2,393
1,555
113
71
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why is it that Mary's immaculate conception, sinless her entire life, and full of grace is found ONLY in the Catechism of the Catholic Church
Precious friend, Yes, Very Amazing! For me, after leaving religion, I found out what
Mary AND I had in common, as SINNERS!: We BOTH Very Badly NEEDED:

A SAVIOUR! Amen. Praise God, SHE "said so!":

Luk_1:47 "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY SAVIOUR!"

Thanks be Unto God, HE "Also SAVED
me, TOO!" And, like her, I REJOICE Also!!
 

Tong2020

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2020
4,854
848
113
*
Faith
Christian
Country
Philippines
Tong2020 said:
I did not get your answer to my question regarding the election of the Pope.

“Do you believe that they are infallible in their election of one of them as the Pope. That their election of one to be Pope, is whom the Holy Spirit choose to be Pope? So that whoever is elected have the approval of God?”
I don’t know
I would think them motivated by the Holy Spirit but not sure about infallible
Thank you for an honest answer.

But then, what I am made to understand is that the RCC leadership declares the elected Pope as the successor of Peter, one chosen by the Holy Spirit, right? And so, the faithful in all likelihood believes of the elected Pope and believes what the Pope says. And this even, not without a celebration of such election, right? And that they must agree with and obey the Pope, at least in matters of faith and morals.

If I were to consider your position, you aren’t sure that the Pope they elected is the chosen by the Holy Spirit to be the RCC Pope. And so, I would understand you if you have your doubts.

<<<the CCC is in doubt the old catechisms are trustworthy in my opinion >>>

Are you saying, in your opinion, the old CCC have errors, or have some false teachings?

Please clarify. Thanks.

the old are good the new one called the ccc is in doubt

the catechism of the council of Trent
The catechism of Pius x
And radio replies are trustworthy

Sorry but I find that not clear enough for me to get all what you try to say.

All I get is that the new CCC are doubtful to you. Are you sort of losing full faith in the new CCC? I am made curious as to what in the new CCC are doubtful to you or made you say that the new CCC is in doubt.

<<<papal infallibility only applies to the teaching of the pope on matters of faith and morals….>>>

I see. So infallibility only applies to the Pope, in his teachings on the matter of faith and morals.

Are the Pope’s teachings on the matter of faith and morals then becomes RCC official doctrines, since the Pope is infallible with respect to that?

By the way, rare as you say that may be, it follows that there is at least an instance, maybe two, three, or more, over thousand of years of Papal history, right? Can you cite some, where the Pope invoked apostolic authority to the universal church and what he taught?

If it is officially defined doctrine like the immaculate conception 1854 or the assumption 1950

So, there is the condition that what the Pope teach, even on matters of faith and morals, though He is believed to be infallible on that, before it is taken as true doctrine of the RCC, must first be made an officially defined doctrine. That’s strange and quite ambiguous with respect to the infallibility of the Pope. But thank you for your answer.

Tong
R4672
 

Tong2020

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2020
4,854
848
113
*
Faith
Christian
Country
Philippines
Tong2020 said:
You already said those things in your other posts.

Can you tell me your answers to the questions in my post that you quoted and responded?

Thanks.

Additionally,

<<<conceived and created immaculate>>>

Scriptures please.

If Mary was conceived immaculate, what can you say of her mother and father?
it was a natural conception of her parents
In the first moment of her existence God created her without original sin

So, there was no need for her mother to have been immaculately conceived as well? It is just strange that regarding Jesus’ conception, it needs be that Mary should be without sin or immaculate such that the idea that Mary’s immaculately conception have been brought forth by the RCC, and not with Mary’s mother.

If by a miracle, a natural conception could bring forth Mary as sinless and immaculate and without the original sin that the RCC teach, it is strange that it could not be with Jesus, that for Jesus to be without original sin, it needs for Mary to be without sin and original sin as well.

Well,…thank you. At least now I know come to know a bit more of what RCC believes about that.

Tong
R4673
 
Last edited:

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
So, there was no need for her mother to have been immaculately conceived as well? It is just strange that regarding Jesus’ conception, it needs be that Mary should be without sin or immaculate such that the idea that Mary’s immaculately conception have been brought forth by the RCC, and not with Mary’s mother.

If by a miracle, a natural conception could brought forth Mary as sinless and immaculate and without the original sin that the RCC teach, it is strange that it could not be with Jesus, that for Jesus to be without original sin, it needs for Mary to be without sin and original sin as well.

Well,…thank you. At least now what RCC believes about that.

Tong
R4673

I think you are missing the point here.
Mary was conceived naturally unlike Jesus who was conceived supernaturally by the power of the Holy Spirit.
But Mary needed a saviour to save her from the effects of original sin that she would normally be afflicted with as we all are.
Jesus received his humanity from Mary and if she had not been immaculate then he would normally have effects of original sin like us. He would therefore have needed a saviour himself.
Mary's preservation was for Jesus not just for herself.
 

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Feb 27, 2020
14,594
8,281
113
58
Columbus, ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think you are missing the point here.
Mary was conceived naturally unlike Jesus who was conceived supernaturally by the power of the Holy Spirit.
But Mary needed a saviour to save her from the effects of original sin that she would normally be afflicted with as we all are.
Jesus received his humanity from Mary and if she had not been immaculate then he would normally have effects of original sin like us. He would therefore have needed a saviour himself.
Mary's preservation was for Jesus not just for herself.
Scripture says in adam all die. It was adam, not eve to whom original sin was spread.

Thats why Jesus had no earthly father. Mary’s seed is untouched. All of eves daughters seed is untouched. The sin is passed when the male seed fertilizes the female seed and it becomes a cell.

The HS fertilized Marie’s seed so it would become a living cell and create a human body. Jesus then entered that Body at the moment of birth. And the body with Mary and the HS created become a living soul
 

Tong2020

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2020
4,854
848
113
*
Faith
Christian
Country
Philippines
Tong2020 said:
So, there was no need for her mother to have been immaculately conceived as well? It is just strange that regarding Jesus’ conception, it needs be that Mary should be without sin or immaculate such that the idea that Mary’s immaculately conception have been brought forth by the RCC, and not with Mary’s mother.

If by a miracle, a natural conception could brought forth Mary as sinless and immaculate and without the original sin that the RCC teach, it is strange that it could not be with Jesus, that for Jesus to be without original sin, it needs for Mary to be without sin and original sin as well.

Well,…thank you. At least now what RCC believes about that.
I think you are missing the point here.
Mary was conceived naturally unlike Jesus who was conceived supernaturally by the power of the Holy Spirit.
But Mary needed a saviour to save her from the effects of original sin that she would normally be afflicted with as we all are.
Jesus received his humanity from Mary and if she had not been immaculate then he would normally have effects of original sin like us. He would therefore have needed a saviour himself.
Mary's preservation was for Jesus not just for herself.
I was not saying or suggesting anything. I was reacting to what your brethren in the RCC said regarding Mary, and I quote “In the first moment of her existence God created her without original sin”.

<<<But Mary needed a saviour to save her from the effects of original sin that she would normally be afflicted with as we all are.>>>

Can I read anything about that conception and about how she was supposedly saved from the effects of original sin? Or is this just a speculation or conjecture or a make belief?

Why do you say that Mary needed a Savior to save her from the effects of ‘original sin’?

Tong
R4675
 
Last edited:

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
I was not saying or suggesting anything. I was reacting to what your brethren in the RCC said regarding Mary, and I quote “In the first moment of her existence God created her without original sin”.

<<<But Mary needed a saviour to save her from the effects of original sin that she would normally be afflicted with as we all are.>>>

Can I read anything about that conception and about how she was supposedly saved from the effects of original sin? Or is this just a speculation or conjecture or a make belief?

Why do you say that Mary needed a Savior to save her from the effects of ‘original sin’?

Tong
R4675

She needed saving from the effects of original sin because either:
a) Jesus would have been afflicted wither effects of original sin
or
b) Jesus would need a saviour.

Jesus was conceived pure and immaculate because Mary was pure and immaculate. As Job said “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? There is not one.” (Job 14:4).

We can be saved in two ways. An example often given is falling into a muddy pit.
1. Being rescued from the muddy pit after we have fallen into it
2. Being prevented from falling into that muddy it at the moment we are about to fall into it

In Lk 1:18 the angel greets Mary with the Greek word kecharitomene which is sometimes translated as “highly favoured”. However this a rather weak translation and more accurately is should be translated as “full of grace”. Even that is a simplification. The Greek kecharitomene is the perfect passive participle of the Greek charitoo. It means endowed with grace. The Greek perfect tense denotes something which took place in the past and continues in the present.

"It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace." (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, (University of Chicago Press, 1961), 166; H.W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge Harvard University Press, 1968, sect 1852:b. - citation from Dave Armstong's A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, p178)
So Mary was completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.
 

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Feb 27, 2020
14,594
8,281
113
58
Columbus, ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
She needed saving from the effects of original sin because either:
a) Jesus would have been afflicted wither effects of original sin
or
b) Jesus would need a saviour.
None is true

Sin passed from adam (male) not eve (female)

Jesus would only have been tainted with sin if a man touched the seed of mary