Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1   [ 20 posts ]   
Author Message
 Post subject: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2021 6:36 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 6:33 pm
Posts: 2
Religion: Baptist
I have been seeing a man who is catholic, I’m Protestant. He tells me the RC church believes Mary is sinless. Can I ask where the proof is? I have researched and found to no avail proof that the early Christians believed Mary was sinless. Catholic encyclopedia points out that John chrsysotom, who is a doctor of the church, believes Mary was a sinner. So did St. Basil. Origen calls her immaculate, and yet in another place says she sinned. Catholic encyclopedia did not leave me with much proof that they believed she was a sinner. St. Augustine who came up with the theory of original sin said Christ was the exception to the rule, so there goes the immaculate conception. Pretty much all the church fathers interpret luke 2:35 as the sword that pierced Mary’s heart being unbelief. Ex from Hilary of Poitiers: if this virgin, made capable of conceiving God, will encounter the severity of this judgment, who will dare to escape?”
John chrysostom : “And this He said, not as being ashamed of His mother, nor denying her that bare Him; for if He had been ashamed of her, He would not have passed through that womb; but as declaring that she has no advantage from this, unless she do all that is required to be done. For in fact that which she had essayed to do, was of superfluous vanity; in that she wanted to show the people that she has power and authority over her Son, imagining not as yet anything great concerning Him; whence also her unseasonable approach.”
St basil: “Simeon therefore prophesies about Mary herself, that when standing by the cross, and beholding what is being done, and hearing the voices, after the witness of Gabriel, after her secret knowledge of the divine conception, after the great exhibition of miracles, she shall feel about her soul a mighty tempest. The Lord was bound to taste of death for every man—to become a propitiation for the world and to justify all men by His own blood. Even you yourself, who hast been taught from on high the things concerning the Lord, shall be reached by some doubt. This is the sword. “That the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” He indicates that after the offense at the Cross of Christ a certain swift healing shall come from the Lord to the disciples and to Mary herself, confirming their heart in faith in Him. In the same way we saw Peter, after he had been offended, holding more firmly to his faith in Christ”

Not wanting to pass rash judgement on him, I come here. So I am asking you guys, where is the proof that Mary was believed to be sinless in the early church?
Even fr. juniper carol in his mariology book admits the veneration of Mary as holy as a progress and a novel thought : “with respect to Our Lady’s holiness, the year 431 [A.D.] marks a turning point for Eastern patristic thought. Before Ephesus, Oriental theology is apparently unaware of a problem in this regard.” (Juniper Carol, Mariology, vol. 2, 125)


So I ask, why is it that this new doctrine can come about? If the apostles were given the fullness of the faith as the RCC teaches, and they taught it to the early Christians, why were the early church fathers saying Mary was a sinner? Do Catholics believe doctrines can “develop?” It’s the only explanation I see…
I’m willing to understand but I need historical proof, not some Bible interpretations from what I’ve seen here on Reddit. If you guys believe in tradition I need proof that it was a tradition from the beginning, not a novel contradiction.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 9:07 am 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33882
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
Doctrine does develop, of course. Baptists, for example, accept doctrines that were ironed out by the Catholic Church with theological precision only in the 4th century or later. Development does not allow for contradiction, of course. The standard illustration of development is of the growth of an oak tree from an acorn. It's an organic progress of growth from within according to the inner logic of the thing. This is certainly how our understanding of Our Lady's role grew. I haven't looked up these passages you cited but of course even finding one or two Fathers who teach material heresy on the point doesn't show there's contradiction in the doctrine of the Church. The Fathers hold authority insofar as they agree always and everywhere, and not in their individual views.

Somebody else will chime in on the textual questions, I reckon.

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:13 am 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19817
gherkin wrote:
Doctrine does develop, of course. Baptists, for example, accept doctrines that were ironed out by the Catholic Church with theological precision only in the 4th century or later. Development does not allow for contradiction, of course. The standard illustration of development is of the growth of an oak tree from an acorn. It's an organic progress of growth from within according to the inner logic of the thing. This is certainly how our understanding of Our Lady's role grew. I haven't looked up these passages you cited but of course even finding one or two Fathers who teach material heresy on the point doesn't show there's contradiction in the doctrine of the Church. The Fathers hold authority insofar as they agree always and everywhere, and not in their individual views.

Somebody else will chime in on the textual questions, I reckon.



You've made the first point I was expecting to see. I will await any other discussion

Won't be from me, of course.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:32 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 7:04 pm
Posts: 569
Location: Arkansas Ozarks
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th KofC
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (meaning Mary was born without sin) is based on tradition -- early Christians believed it. It was officially proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854. This is one of only two instances of Papal Infallibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:38 am 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 6:33 pm
Posts: 2
Religion: Baptist
GKC wrote:
gherkin wrote:
Doctrine does develop, of course. Baptists, for example, accept doctrines that were ironed out by the Catholic Church with theological precision only in the 4th century or later. Development does not allow for contradiction, of course. The standard illustration of development is of the growth of an oak tree from an acorn. It's an organic progress of growth from within according to the inner logic of the thing. This is certainly how our understanding of Our Lady's role grew. I haven't looked up these passages you cited but of course even finding one or two Fathers who teach material heresy on the point doesn't show there's contradiction in the doctrine of the Church. The Fathers hold authority insofar as they agree always and everywhere, and not in their individual views.

Somebody else will chime in on the textual questions, I reckon.



You've made the first point I was expecting to see. I will await any other discussion

Won't be from me, of course.

Doctrines don’t develop in my world. They exist already and are later fleshed out. I’m going to assume that’s what you mean. It’s not “2” fathers teaching heterodoxy, like I pointed out, these are just some quotes, they pretty much all agree that Mary was a sinner. You can see juniper carol saying the early fathers were not “aware” they had to present Mary as sinless. I wonder why? Maybe because it wasn’t taught to them as doctrine by the apostles?
I would love if someone can pull me up at least 3 fathers of the early church that taught Mary was sinless. I can’t find any.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:46 am 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33882
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
GKC wrote:
You've made the first point I was expecting to see.

Well, this ain't our first rodeo.

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:59 am 
Offline
Board Administrator
Board Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:44 am
Posts: 19313
Religion: Catholic
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

_________________
Please pray for Mr. Biden's conversion and health.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:24 pm 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19817
gherkin wrote:
GKC wrote:
You've made the first point I was expecting to see.

Well, this ain't our first rodeo.


Nope.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:26 pm 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33882
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
Zeno wrote:
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

Sounds like this isn't a thread for Cath 101 anyway. The OP is obviously not asking questions, but courting arguments.

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:31 pm 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33882
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
Question0009 wrote:
Doctrines don’t develop in my world. They exist already and are later fleshed out. I’m going to assume that’s what you mean.

Of course they exist, in the same sense that the oak tree exists when the organism is an acorn, like I said above.

Quote:
It’s not “2” fathers teaching heterodoxy, like I pointed out, these are just some quotes, they pretty much all agree that Mary was a sinner.

That's a pretty solid contention. I guess you should give more than two examples if you want to say they pretty much all agree!

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:37 pm 
Offline
Board Administrator
Board Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:44 am
Posts: 19313
Religion: Catholic
gherkin wrote:
Zeno wrote:
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

Sounds like this isn't a thread for Cath 101 anyway. The OP is obviously not asking questions, but courting arguments.

I did contemplate moving it to apologetics but am waiting to see how it goes.

_________________
Please pray for Mr. Biden's conversion and health.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:23 pm 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19817
gherkin wrote:
Zeno wrote:
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

Sounds like this isn't a thread for Cath 101 anyway. The OP is obviously not asking questions, but courting arguments.



Again, we march in step.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:38 pm 
Offline
King of Cool
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 76657
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
Question0009 wrote:
I would love if someone can pull me up at least 3 fathers of the early church that taught Mary was sinless. I can’t find any.


This is a bit like asking me to name 3 days of the week that end in 'y'.

Oh, just at random

St. Irenaeus
St. Ephrem the Syrian
St. Augustine

Pretty much every father who ever spoke on the issue. But you want to mention John Chrysostom, without even bothering to take into account that he was actually RESPONDING to beliefs that he knew existed everywhere. Your argument is a little like saying that because Martin Luther denounced indulgences, therefore, no doctrine of indulgences existed in his era, it is bizarrely misplaced.

_________________
Excelsior!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 10:07 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept

Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:33 am
Posts: 4192
Religion: Catholic
So, the great thing is this, the Catholic Church has always allowed discussion and debate about beliefs until they are declared “dogma” for lack of a better term.

The Marian beliefs were held, discussed, and yes, even debated for generations. The Church held certain Marian beliefs, but yes, even some saints were not so sure about them. We can discuss what it means to be declared a saint, but suffusive to say, saints aren’t all theologians, philosophers, and a host of other disciplines. Some were just holy mothers and fathers. So just because a saint said something that might be contrary to a popularly held belief, doesn’t mean that saint was correct.

All that being said, there are some really good reasons why the Marian dogmas are true. Namely, it is “fitting” that the Mother of God should be sinless, a perpetual virgin, assumed into Heaven and immaculately conceived.

If one thinks about it, if you had the ability to do certain things for your mother, wouldn’t you do the same? I mean, if I could keep my mom from sinning, being born without original sin and assumed into Heaven, I would do it in a heart beat.

Even more so for the King of Kings to do for His Mother; because He can, did, and it was fitting.

Yes, Jesus could have been born of a sinful woman, but, doesn’t it seem more fitting that He be born of a woman who was sinless? Could Mary had died, been buried and her body decay like the rest of us? Sure. But doesn’t it seem proper that Jesus would protect her body from that corruption? I mean, God did that for a few others in the Bible, why not His Mother?

We can discuss the other topics, but you get the idea.

So from a convert, the Marian dogmas make perfect sense to me.

_________________
"So mercifully blessed to be free from the ravages of intelligence." - Taken from Time Bandits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2021 8:24 am 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19817
Peetem wrote:
So, the great thing is this, the Catholic Church has always allowed discussion and debate about beliefs until they are declared “dogma” for lack of a better term.

The Marian beliefs were held, discussed, and yes, even debated for generations. The Church held certain Marian beliefs, but yes, even some saints were not so sure about them. We can discuss what it means to be declared a saint, but suffusive to say, saints aren’t all theologians, philosophers, and a host of other disciplines. Some were just holy mothers and fathers. So just because a saint said something that might be contrary to a popularly held belief, doesn’t mean that saint was correct.

All that being said, there are some really good reasons why the Marian dogmas are true. Namely, it is “fitting” that the Mother of God should be sinless, a perpetual virgin, assumed into Heaven and immaculately conceived.

If one thinks about it, if you had the ability to do certain things for your mother, wouldn’t you do the same? I mean, if I could keep my mom from sinning, being born without original sin and assumed into Heaven, I would do it in a heart beat.

Even more so for the King of Kings to do for His Mother; because He can, did, and it was fitting.

Yes, Jesus could have been born of a sinful woman, but, doesn’t it seem more fitting that He be born of a woman who was sinless? Could Mary had died, been buried and her body decay like the rest of us? Sure. But doesn’t it seem proper that Jesus would protect her body from that corruption? I mean, God did that for a few others in the Bible, why not His Mother?

We can discuss the other topics, but you get the idea.

So from a convert, the Marian dogmas make perfect sense to me.



And here's another point or two I anticipated.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 7:26 am 
Offline
Criminally Insane Cucumber
Criminally Insane Cucumber
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:20 pm
Posts: 33882
Location: The countertop
Religion: The True One
Church Affiliations: OblSB
Zeno wrote:
gherkin wrote:
Zeno wrote:
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

Sounds like this isn't a thread for Cath 101 anyway. The OP is obviously not asking questions, but courting arguments.

I did contemplate moving it to apologetics but am waiting to see how it goes.

I guess it goes nowhere.

_________________
Suscipe me secundum eloquium tuum, et vivam: et non confundas me ab exspectatione mea.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 9:21 am 
Offline
Some Poor Bibliophile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:22 pm
Posts: 19817
gherkin wrote:
Zeno wrote:
gherkin wrote:
Zeno wrote:
As a new user the OPs posts need approval the first few times. There is a reply above that I didn't want to be missed just because it took a bit to work through the que.

Sounds like this isn't a thread for Cath 101 anyway. The OP is obviously not asking questions, but courting arguments.

I did contemplate moving it to apologetics but am waiting to see how it goes.

I guess it goes nowhere.



Been there before.

_________________
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 1:43 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 82881
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
I blame the pickle.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 3:45 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:05 pm
Posts: 137
Religion: Catholic
You wont be convinced by reading the Church fathers, it takes the faith of a child to know you cant put something clean in a dirty vessel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Mary sinless
PostPosted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 4:17 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:05 pm
Posts: 137
Religion: Catholic
Ask a child if Jesus loves His Mother, how do they know the answer to this without reading Aquinas?

How much does Jesus love His mother?

Should you love less?

She stood at the foot of the cross for the entire duration of His Passion. Stabat Mater

She apparently loved her Son more than the Apostles, save John.

The Arc of the Covenant prefigured Mary, it was made of Accacia wood, that did not rot, it contained the word. Mary contained the Word. So the prefigurement of the wood of the Arc not deteriorating was not fulfilled in Mary?

Ask a child this. If the Arc of the covenant contained the word and would not rot and Mary contained the Word will she rot?

Gosh, I dunno let me refer to Ambrose or Augustine.

Why would this prefigure Mary if it were not fulfilled in Her?

Why were there about 20 examples of Kings of Israel, with a mother, whom they declared as Queen, and several examples of women in the Old Testament who gave men severe head trauma. These all prefigure do they not?
She will crush their heads with her seed.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 1 of 1   [ 20 posts ]   


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


Jump to: