cms@gatech.edu (05/29/90)
I'd like to ask all Net.Christians out there a question: How do pray the
Rosary or meditate on the mysteries of our redemption? Do you get more out of
praying the stations of the Cross in a group or as an individual devotion?
Same question for the Rosary?
I'll answer a couple myself but I'm geniunely curious how others feel. I
often pray the Rosary in silent meditation because I find it easier to
concentrate on the mysteries. Furthermore, in most churches, the standard
format is to pray the Hail Marys straight, with no intermediate prayers,
whereas I prefer the Scriptural Rosary in which I pray a short passage from
Scripture (usually the Gospels) before each Hail Mary, followed at the end of
the decade by Glory Be, Oh my Jesus (Fatima), and a lovely addition, "Prince
Michael the Arch-Angel, protect us; Saint Joseph, pray for us." Admittedly, I
sometimes pray the Hail Marys straight so I can concentrate on visualizing the
mysteries in my mind; I visualize Christ praying in the Garden, for example,
based on numerous pictures and movies I've seen. I tend to imagine him
experiencing greater fear, not to downplay anguish, than many pictures. I
imagine his hands shaking, spilling his imaginary cup of suffering. At the
same time, Scripture readings help me to focus on these images. I can't decide
which way I prefer. However, when I pray alone, I can pray as fast or as slow
as I want, linger on a mystery if I so desire. Once, for example, when I
prayed the beginning three HM's for faith, hope, and love, I lingered on
love for about ten HM's by itself!
I feel much the same way about the stations of the Cross. I get a lot out of
group devotion, but I find individual devotion more satisfying, since I'm able
to linger on each mystery as long or as short as I need to complete my own
personal prayers. Still, there is a beauty in moving with people along the
road to calvary, almost as if we're following in the footsteps of Christ as it
actually happened. Being in a group, for me, is crucial to this feeling.
As for Fatima: The Angel of Peace gave the three children a lovely prayer:
"Pray! Pray a great deal. The Hearts of Jesus and Mary have merciful designs
on you. Offer prayers and sacrifices continually to the Most High. Make
everything you do a sacrifice, and offer it as an act of reparation for the
sins by which God is offended, and as a petition for the conversion of sinners.
Bring peace to our country in this way....I am the Guardian Angel of Portugal."
The same angel, the Angel of Peace, earlier said to the children, "Fear not.
I am the Angel of Peace." Kneeling on the ground in humble obeasance to God,
the angel prayed, "O my God, I believe, I adore, I hope and I love Thee. I ask
pardon for those who do not believe, do not adore, do not hope and do not love
Thee." By this prayer, do you believe it's possible for atheists and agnostics
to be saved? I'm still struggling with this one as I'm a great believer in the
efficacy of prayer. The Rosary, as has often been said, is like a great sword
or weapon, a plus-5 Holy Avenger in D&D terms, which the Mother of God uses to
cut down heresy and the forces of evil. The Rosary is the most powerful prayer
to the King of Kings.
I have a friend who had a friend that gave him a Protestant Rosary. I have as
yet to discover this elusive creature, although I've seen mysteries which
substitute the last two glorious for Second Coming and Final Judgment, and uses
a different mantra from the Hail Mary (as I described in an earlier posting).
If more Protestants would pray the Rosary, in whatever way they feel most
comfortable, praying continually for the conversion of Russia, we may yet
succeed in achieving peace. For those Rosary Warriors still in the thick of
the battle: Don't give up now! We're almost halfway there!
How many Net.Christians out there wear the brown scapular, as I do? Sister
Lucia said that all Catholics should wear the brown scapular as part of the
Fatima message. It is a holy habit, "Our Lady's livery." As she said to Saint
Simon Stock, "Whosoever dies clothed in this shall never suffer eternal fire."
For me, honoring Mary, in whatever way but especially in the Rosary, is doing
exactly what God does when he invited Mary to the Mother of his Son, Jesus
Christ; we are doing what God in the Scriptures calls us to do. Martin Luther
preached on Mary's feast days and esteemed her as a modela nd example of the
life of faith. Martin Luther stated unequivocably, "We are the children of
Mary." Today, Catholics and Protestants are examining the role of Mary in the
Scriptures and the meaning of devotion to Mary in the modern world. I
recommend a book called "Mary in the New Testament," edited by Brown, Donfried,
Fitzmyer, and Reumann; it is a collaborative work by Protestant and Catholic
scholars.
I have another question for Protestants in particular: Catholics believe that
Mary is ever-virgin. Some Protestants have said to me, "Protestants don't
believe that. We believe she had subsequent children." Now, I don't think
that's true. Some Protestants may believe that, but staunch Baptists I know
are offended at the very notion that Mary may have had sex and subsequent
children. Inansmuch as Protestants often don't have a list of
things-you-must-believe-to-be-a-Protestant (as opposed to Christian), what do
most Protestants believe on this issue? As I recall, both Luther and Calvin
taught the perpetual virginity of Mary.
Another question to all Christians: I've found that Mary had a significant
impact in the development of my personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Did
Mary have a similar impact on you? Mary is mediatrix of all graces in a way
that glorifies Jesus Christ as the one Mediator. I invoke her as advocate and
mediatrix so that she will lead me to her Son. As Christians, we know that if
we rely on merely external practices in our devotion to Mary rather than on a
serious commitment to the will of God, our devotion is deficient. On the other
hand, *true* devotion to Mary cannot be exaggerated, for true devotion always
brings us closer to God and to God's people.
As Christians, we believe that showing devotion to Mary is our way of
reminding ourselves of the mighty things God has done for us and is still doing
for us; or, as Mary herself said, "From this day forward all generations will
call me blessed; for the Almighty God has done great things for me, and holy is
his name." I am proud to be numbered in the generation that is privileged to
call Mary blessed.
--
Sincerely,
_///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ //
_///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<<
<`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\
\\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\
\\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ //
emory!dragon!cms <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<<
\\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\
GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgiast0o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Steven Timm) (06/05/90)
This is in reply to the questions asked in Cindy Smith's article on Mary, some questions of which were directed at Protestants and some at all Christians. Please note here I speak only for myself, not for my denomination or for Protestantism in general. [question of praying Rosary in groups or alone] Since I don't pray the Rosary, I can't answer for the case of the Rosary specifically, but I've found both individual and group prayer helpful in different ways. Individual prayer is beneficial to me in working out the very personal and private things in my life, and making intercession for others. Group prayer I have also found helpful, particularly for the Church and the world as a whole. I agree that it is very important to meditate on the Passion of Christ, recently for this purpose I memorized the gospel of St. John and found it to be a very moving experience. I may be showing my ignorance, but I believe that the Our Father is included in the Rosary [no?] and I find this prayer very meaningful. I have spent time exploring the sevenfold theme of this prayer and the places it is reflected elsewhere in the Bible. Question: can a certain prayer [or any other prayer] cause the salvation of others? I think prayer can be important in the following way: it may make you more open to that person's need and ready to share the Good News of Christ with him when he is ready. Also, God may in response to your prayer give that person an opportunity to hear the gospel. I think the final choice is up to the individual, however. Question: Do most Protestants believe that Mary had children? I suspect many don't know. The Bible does record that Jesus had brothers. Whether these were sons only of Joseph by a previous marriage or not, who can say? It is no great theological barrier to me if she did have other children. The Bible says "Joseph knew her not until she had brought forth her first-born son." If Jewish custom is our guide, we can expect that he did know her (have sexual intercourse) thereafter, whether or not children were produced. Does the idea that Mary must always have been a virgin have its root in the Medieval idea that all sex was sinful? Cindy mentions that if Protestants as well as Catholics prayed the rosary, things would happen quickly. While I see the virtue in meditating on the life of Christ (and perhaps even on the life of Mary) it seems to me that the most efficacious prayer for the conversion of Eastern Europe, for example, would be "Dear God, We pray that those in Eastern Europe who don't know You will come to know you and be saved." (Nothing magical about the words. But if you want something from God, why not just ask him for it instead of repeating the Hail Mary n times?" Jesus said "If ye ask anything in my name, I will do it." It's been interesting to hear why Catholics and some Protestants see the Virgin as a mediator. If I indeed believed Mary and the saints were in Heaven right now [which I don't] it would seem like an effective way, and no more questionable than asking living friends to pray for you. Let me point out that even Jesus said "I do not say that I will pray the Father for you, for the Father himself loveth you." The first Protestant reflex is to substitute Jesus himself as the mediator in place of MAry. But this leads, as does the Catholic notion, to the idea of a God the Father who is unapproachable, and must be appeased and/or cajoled into loving us. Viewed within the framework of the Immaculate Conception, then Christ really wasn't like us, and Mary becomes a necessary mediator between man and God. Personally, I hold no such view, Christ was like us, and if I need a mediator, he's all the mediator I need. He doesn't have to do any work to cajole God the Father--God already loves us. The work of the mediator is to speak to *our* hearts and bring us back into oneness with God. Steve
ta00est@unccvax.UUCP (elizabeth s tallant) (06/05/90)
This is in response to your questions about Mary. First, the Bible clearly states that Joseph was Mary's husband. The angel told Joseph that he was not to TOUCH (which obviously means have ---) until after the child (Jesus) was born. From a logical standpoint, the angel would not tell Joseph when he could touch Mary unless the angel knew that he was going to do such. Further, the Bible COMMANDS that husaband and wife give due physical attention to each other. Since the Bible gives this command and since Mary was Joseph's wife, then Mary would have been a bad wife if she would not have ---. Secondly, there is a passage of scripture which tells us that Jesus had at least one sister. In the passage, Jesus is very busy when someone comes in to tell him that his mother and sister want to see Him. Then, Jesus says "Who is my mother and who is my sister?" Then, he goes on to explain that His relatives are spiritual relatives. With all due respect to Jesus' point, this passage makes clear that Jesus had a biological sister. He used His mother and His biological sister to make the point that all Christians are spiritually related, thereby crossing boundaries over biology. Further, the Gospels indicate that Jesus had brothers, and that one of these brothers was the disciple John. (There were two (or three?) disciples named John. His brother was not the disciple who wrote the Gospel of John.) If anyone is truly interest in this or the above passage, I will tell you its exact location in the Bible. In response to you questions about hail Marys and asking dead saints to pray for you, I have one main response: Read your Bible. I have found absolutely no incidence in the Scripture in which anyone, disciple, prophet, saint, or otherwise, prayed to anyone other than the Father, the Son, or the Spirit. We are to follow the examples of the prophets, disciples, the apostle Paul, and the Son. (Flame on: Forget about all these other so-called saints who came after the Bible was written. Jesus told us to pray to His Father is Heaven through Christ and that if we need any additional help in convincing the Father, then Jesus will plead our case in front of Him. Jesus did not say to ask such a so-in-so, no matter how rightous that person might be. Flame off.) Further Jesus gave us a model prayer. He said pray according to this manner: "Our Father, who art in Heaven, Holy be they Name. May Thy Kingdom come soon and may They Will be done on Earth as it is done in Heaven. Give us this day our sustinence, and forgive us our tresspasses in the same manner that we forgive those who tresspass against us. Please don't temp us and deliver us from evil. For They Kingdom, power and Glory will last forever. Amen" We are to pray according to this manner. This is our outline for prayer. Notice that the Father is the only one that Jesus tells us to address. Nowhere in this model is there room for St. Francis or Mary. The only intercessory that we need is Jesus. If we use anyone else, then we insult Him. When Jesus died, the curtain broke. This curtain covered the place in which the high priest had an annual fellowship with God in order to ntercede for others. By breaking the curtain, God showed us that we Micheal, and not even Mary. Well, I hope this answers some of your questions. If you wish to have further discussion or require scriptural backing, send e-mail. Mindful of Jesus lesson, Your sister is Christ, Elizabeth ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu
hwt@.bnr.ca (Henry Troup) (06/05/90)
In article <May.29.04.06.01.1990.3068@athos.rutgers.edu> emory!dragon!cms@gatech.edu writes: > I have another question for Protestants in particular: Catholics believe that >Mary is ever-virgin.... I don't know what other non-Roman Catholics think, but as an Episcopelian (Scots, now Canadian) I remember being taught that one of the Apostles, "the disciple whom Jesus loved" was his brother. I've certainly never been taught that either Mary or Joseph really had a special place. -- Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions ..uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 or HWT@BNR.CA [That seems sort of odd. The disciple whom Jesus loved seems to have been one of the 12, probably John. John 21:20 seems to say that the Beloved Disciple was one of 12. We have some lists of the 12, and I think we can be fairly sure Jesus' brothers aren't on the list. Mark 3:20-35 implies that his family didn't believe in him, at least early in his ministry. Acts 1:14 certainly implies that his mother and brothers were separate from the 12. James the brother of Jesus (not to be confused with the two disciples who were James: one a son of Zebedee and one of Alphaeus) became a leader in the Church very soon, but I don't see any way he could be the Beloved Disciple. At the very least, it would be an unusual theory. Mary certainly had a special place in theology through most of Christian history, for obvious reasons. Protestant deemphasis of her is probably partly a reaction against Catholic practice. It's only in the last generation that calling something "Roman" was enough to prevent most Protestants from doing it. --clh]
cattanac@clitus.cs.uiuc.edu (Scott Cattanach) (06/07/90)
hwt@.bnr.ca (Henry Troup) writes: >[That seems sort of odd. The disciple whom Jesus loved seems to have >been one of the 12, probably John. John 21:20 seems to say that the >Beloved Disciple was one of 12. We have some lists of the 12, and I >think we can be fairly sure Jesus' brothers aren't on the list. Mark >3:20-35 implies that his family didn't believe in him, at least early >in his ministry. Acts 1:14 certainly implies that his mother and >brothers were separate from the 12. James the brother of Jesus (not >to be confused with the two disciples who were James: one a son of >Zebedee and one of Alphaeus) became a leader in the Church very soon, See also John 7:5 For even His own brothers did not believe in Him. [NKJV] -- -catt (cattanac@cs.uiuc.edu)
max_jedroom@oxy.edu (Jedidiah Jon Palosaari) (06/07/90)
Question about Immaculate Conception, which I don't think have been mentioned to date: Has to do with the book of Mark. In Mark 3 (NIV), it says that Jesus entered a house and "When His family heard about this, they went to take charge of Him, for they said, "He is out of His mind." (The *old* Revised says his family wished to sieze Him.) Jesus' family thought He was crazy. Then right afterward, the teachers of the law accuse Christ of being posessed of a demon, and Jesus mentions the "unforgivable sin", that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. Christ rebukes the teachers for claiming that He was posessed of satan, and it seems like the accusation that Jesus was crazy falls into the same lines. I mean, Mark wrote these things together for a purpose- it seems like there could be easily a connection between accusing Christ of insanity and demon-posession. Even without this connection, it seems wrong to accuse Christ of not being all there mentally, and wrong to wish to stop His ministry. So it seems that here Christ's family sins against Him. But it could be argued that Mary is not with the family at that time, so she therefore does not sin, and is still "immaculate". But then right afterward, with no break in action (only in speaking) Mark tells us that "Jesus' mother and brothers arrived." It's as if Mary, Jesus' mother, is there as well, ready to "sieze" Jesus and accuse Him of insanity as well, thereby sinning! Now this is confusing to me, because I can't understand how this links up with immaculate conception. The Catholic father here wasn't able to help- does anyone have any ideas? -Jedidiah [This question seems to assume that the immaculate conception implies that Mary is unable to make mistakes in matters of faith and morals. I frankly don't know whether that's what is intended or not. Sounds like a good question for one of our Catholic experts. --clh]
ta00est@unccvax.edu (elizabeth s tallant) (06/07/90)
In article <Jun.4.22.58.07.1990.15168@athos.rutgers.edu>, st0o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Steven Timm) writes: > I think prayer can be important in the following way: it may make you > more open to that person's need and ready to share the Good News of > Christ with him when he is ready. Also, God may in response to your prayer > give that person an opportunity to hear the gospel. I think the final > choice is up to the individual, however. > I totally agree that the final choice is up to the individual. If praying for others is a sure-fire way for them to be saved, then everyone on this earth would be saved, as I'm sure that many righteous people have prayed for the salvation of all of mankind. In addition to giving us power to witness, praying to God for the salvation of someone else may cause God to place that person "under conviction," that is, cause that person to have a strong, possibly even overwhelming urge to accept Christ. Some people give in to this urge while others fight it, therefore, not everyone who experiences this urge will be saved. > Question: Do most Protestants believe that Mary had children? > > I suspect many don't know. The Bible does record that Jesus had brothers. > As I posted earlier, the Bible also says that Jesus had a sister. > > Let me point out that even Jesus said "I do not say that I will pray > the Father for you, for the Father himself loveth you." The first > Where is this scripture found? I am curious. Please recall that Jesus also said that for those who confess Him before men, He will confess before His father in Heaven. Also recall that when Jesus died, the curtain covering the place where the intercessory priest went annually was broken. This says to me that Jesus is our intercessory. Protestant reflex is to substitute Jesus himself as the mediator > in place of MAry. But this leads, as does the Catholic notion, to > the idea of a God the Father who is unapproachable, and must be > appeased and/or cajoled into loving us. > > Steve We cannot approach God directly because we are sooooo sinful. Please see my above paragraph. Sin creates a barrier between us and God. Don't ever for even a moment think that God must be cajoled into loving us because it is the Father who sent His Son to bear the sins of the entire world and to die for us. That takes an incomprehensible amount of love. It is the Father who sent Jesus to fill in the link between Him and us. Elizabeth
dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) (06/09/90)
Immaculate Conception means that Mary was born without stain
of original sin. It's a rather circumscribed concept.
--
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.educms@dragon.uucp (06/09/90)
[Jedidiah Jon Palosaari asks aboaut the relation of the Immaculate Conception
to Mark 3, in which Jesus' family believed he was crazy. While Mary is
not mentioned as being present in part of it, she is mentioned as one
of those ready to "sieze" Jesus. I get the impresssion that Jedidiah Jon
is bothered by the fact that Mary seems her to be making a mistake,
which seems to contradict the idea that she is sinless. He asks for
clarification. --clh]
The Immaculate Conception means that Mary is preserved from all stain of
original sin; this means that she was protected from her conception from
estrangement from God, which is the result of sin. Her freedom from sin was a
gift from God. Mary was perfect in purity of morals and holiness of life.
The Scriptural derivation is from Luke 1:28.
chaire, kecharitomene, ho kyrios meta sou (Nestle, UBSGNT)
NRSV: "Greetings, favored one, the Lord is with you."
RNAB : "Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you."
Douay: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee."
NAB: "Rejoice, O highly favored daughter! The Lord is with you."
This passage has caused much debate. The word "grace" (charis) is associated
with joy (chara) and wisdom (sophia). The translation of kecharitomene,
according to one source, is a play on chaire and is the perfect passive
participle of charitoun, a denominative verb related to charis (grace, favor)
which means "to bestow favor on, highly favor, bless." Mary is thus one who
has been graciously favored by God as is explained the v. 30, "You have found
favor with God." Greek verbs ending in oo, according to another source, do not
imply fullness but rather instrumentality. My first source says that while a
denominative verb us usually instrumental or factitive (charitoun means to
constitute someone in charis), occasionally it carries a sense of plenitude.
One translation has it "I salute you, object of divine favor." God is the
source of goodness; Mary is the object of God's grace and favor. Since the
verb is a participal, "Mary is shown to have been chosen for a long time past;
God's full flow of favor has already been concentrating upon her." (Jerome
Commentary.) Mary is the object of some of the greatest Biblical salutations:
1:28, 30, 35 42-49. In 2:35, "and you yourself a sword will pierce" indicates
that her blessedness as mother of God will be challenged by her Son who calls
true blessedness "hearing the word of God and observing it." Thus, Mary is
twice blessed, both as Mother of God by God and as one who hears the word of
God and observes it, "Be it unto me according to your word."
The Bible makes no distinction between body and soul (rendering the fullest
meaning for "Body of Christ"); thus, in Mary, more than anyone else, God's
messianic fulfillment is achieved.
Back to chaire (rejoice): this word was used for the normal secular Greek way
of hailing someone (hello) or in beginning and ending a letter. Some argue
that it should be translated "rejoice" because, in scenes with a semitic
background, Luke uses eirene ("peace," in Hebrew, "shalom") and not chaire as
the ordinary greeting. In the LXX, chairein appears about eight times; around
20 times its use refers to a joy that greets a divine saving act; in 1:28 it is
thought that Luke has this meaning in mind. The specific term chaire is used
in the LXX only four times, three of them addressed to the Daughter of Zion:
Zech 9:9 (quoted in Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15):
Rejoice heartily! (chaire!), O daughter Zion,
shout for joy, O daughter Jerusalem!
See, your king shall come to you,
a just savior is he,
Meek, and riding on an ass,
on a colt, the foal of an ass.
Zeph 3:14-17:
Shout for joy, O daughter Zion!
sing joyfully, O Israel!
Be glad and exult with all your heart,
O daughter Jerusalem!
The Lord has removed the judgment against you,
he has turned away your enemies;
The King of Israel, the LORD, is in your midst,
and you have no further misfortune to fear.
One of my sources contradicts this theory by noting that Greeks would no more
take chaire literally as "rejoice" than modern Americans would take goodbye
literally as "God be with ye." Another problem is that most of the OT
references to the Daughter of Zion are uncomplimentary; most potray her in a
state of oppression, or as a prostitute full of lust. Still, I argue that Mary
as Jerusalem, as the Mother of the Church, is all that is good about Jerusalem
because God's gracious favor rests upon her.
Luke describes Mary in terms of his Old Testament background knowledge of
Abraham and Sarah, Daniel's description of Gabriel, the Samuel story, the
promise of David, and various and sundry OT anunciation-birth standbys.
Another extremely important image of Mary is Ark of the Covenant (my own
personal favorite title for My Lady) or the Tabernacle. In 1:35 Mary is told,
"The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will
overshadow you." The same verb is used when the cloud of God's glory
overshadows the tabernacle in the desert (Exodus 40:35, Numbers 9:18, 22), and
when the winged cherubim overshadow the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:20,
1 Chronicles 28:18). Elizabeth greets Mary in Luke 1:43, "And how does this
happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" Compare this to
2 Samuel 6:9 when David fears the Lord and says, "How can the ark of the Lord
come to me?" Mary stays with Elizabeth about three months; the Ark of the
Covenant remains three months in the house of Obededom. John 1:14 literally
translates, "And the Word became flesh and pitched his tent/tabernacle among
us."
The Ark of the Covenant (OT) is anointed by the priests with holy oil, etc.
and subsequently anointed by God; Mary is anointed by her Immaculate Conception
and is subsequently anointed by God. First the Ark of the Covenant (OT) is
made holy by its creation according to the exacting specifications of God;
first the Ark of the Covenant (NT) is made holy by its creation according to
the exacting specifications of God. Then, the Ark of the Covenant is presented
to God; God indicates his approval by overshadowing the Ark of the Covenant
(both OT and NT).
As for Jesus's family thinking he was beside himself, some of my sources
suggest that Jesus is overworked; additionally, his family is fearful of the
crowd, that they might harm Jesus in their zeal. The Gospels do say that the
disciples couldn't even eat for the crowds. The family of Jesus want to sieze
him because they seem to be saying, "The crowds are too large; they're not
giving you any peace; anyone could be in the crowd, be careful; are you crazy
letting the crowd invade the house like that, you could get hurt," etc. Houses
in ancient Israel would open affairs; kind of like a large porch, one which is
built around the entire house, if you can imagine that. When Jesus dines with
the Pharisees, you see the same arrangement, with some woman coming out of the
crowd to anoint his feet with her tears. Other passages cited from the Old
Testament remind us that the Messiah will be "eaten up with zeal for your
house," re the Temple incident driving out the money changers. Jesus is eaten
up with zeal for the House of the Lord and his family is worried about his
fervor as well as the fervor of the crowds. It does say elsewhere that not
even his brothers believed in him but I don't believe this makes any mention of
Mary. Mary is the first person to believe in him (re anunciation, Cana). Mary
is thus the first disciple of Jesus. Certainly his closest disciples among the
Apostles were less loyal, especially Peter. It's the women who are loyal to
him even on the road to Calvary and at the Tomb. You don't see the men going
to anoint the body but then perhaps men didn't do that kind of thing anyway;
I'm not sure about that. Also, re his brothers not believing in him, at least
James believed in him later.
--
Sincerely,
_///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ //
_///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<<
<`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\
\\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\
\\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ //
emory!dragon!cms <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<<
\\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\
GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgialeesa@eecae.ee.msu.edu (Anita Lees) (08/06/90)
clh asked (a while ago! mea culpa) for a Catholic response to the current state of devotion to Mary, and how Marian devotion can be reconciled with accepted (Protestant) Christian doctrine. This all was engendered by a posting of Benjamin Brittan's (sp?) carol. I think the question of what mainstream Catholics believe about Mary has been dealt with pretty well already, although I'd add an historical aside. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception was the first ever infallible statement by a pope, Pius IX. The petrine ministry was accorded infallibilty (under various restrictions) during the first Vatican council, in 1870. Many bishops (notably from the US) abstained in the vote, and the decision caused a schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the "Old Catholics" in the US. Note that the Orthodox, who do not accept either Marian dogma, are in communion with the RC Church. The two Marian dogmas (Immaculate Conception and Assumption) originally rested on the priciple "potuit, decuit, fecit" -- "it was possible, it was right, it was done". According to this, if it was proper for God to dosomething (it is always possible), then He did it. The problem is decidingthe "decuit" part. Do we mean proper by our standards, or God's? The Tradition was based on the humanity of Jesus; we assume that He would want the same for His mother as we would for our own mothers. More recently, the Assumption is seen to flow from the sinlessness of Mary. I don't see how believing this could prevent someone from being a goodChristian, as long as the focus is on Jesus and His role as the sole ultimate mediator between humanity and God. I was shocked to read the excerpts posted from Liguori's book, which I have not read. Were any Catholic netters NOT shocked? I looked him up and found this. Alphonsus Mary de Liguori (1696-1787) founded the Redemptorist 1st and 2nd orders. He started out as a lawyer, but later became a priest. Pope Pius IX declared him a Doctor of the Church in 1871. Liguori's book, "The Glories of Mary", is one of the things for which he is supposed to be famous. His theology is an example of Marian maximalism, for a discussion of which see McBrien's tome, "Catholicism". Anita F. Lees leesa@frith.egr.msu.edu -- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Anita F. Lees leesa@frith.egr.msu.edu