A Necessity - 4 Marian Doctrines

[JoeT]

On recent threads, the conversation turned to the Mother of God, Mary. I contend however that the Catholic Marian Doctrines are not only profitable to knowing Jesus Christ, but also a necessity to our love of the Lord.

St. Augustine once said, and I’ll paraphrase, ‘no one can love what is not known’. [St. Augustine, On the Holy Trinity, X] St. Paul gets more to the point couching it a little differently, “But if any man love God, the same is known by him." [1 Corinthians 8:3]. You might recall from the Magnificat where Mary makes two passionate statements. The first is she is the handmaiden of God implying a spousal relationship. The other is that her soul “magnifies the Lord”.

And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy: As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever." [Luke 1:46-55]​

The four Marian dogmas regarding Mary are the Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, perpetual virginity, and Assumption, I’m not sure if they came in that order. Nevertheless, each of these doctrines ‘magnify’ the Lord who is the Second Person of the Trinity, wholly Divine, wholly human without mixing or confusion, in unity uniquely and inseparably joined.

Consequently, without adopting and knowing these doctrines one does not truly know Jesus Christ except maybe superficially, a peffi faith [Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:3]. Jesus Christ becomes a confused image in a dark opaque shadow.

JoeT

 

[Maria Billingsley]

On recent threads, the conversation turned to the Mother of God, Mary. I contend however that the Catholic Marian Doctrines are not only profitable to knowing Jesus Christ, but also a necessity to our love of the Lord.

St. Augustine once said, and I’ll paraphrase, ‘no one can love what is not known’. [St. Augustine, On the Holy Trinity, X] St. Paul gets more to the point couching it a little differently, “But if any man love God, the same is known by him." [1 Corinthians 8:3]. You might recall from the Magnificat where Mary makes two passionate statements. The first is she is the handmaiden of God implying a spousal relationship. The other is that her soul “magnifies the Lord”.

And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy: As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever." [Luke 1:46-55]​

The four Marian dogmas regarding Mary are the Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, perpetual virginity, and Assumption, I’m not sure if they came in that order. Nevertheless, each of these doctrines ‘magnify’ the Lord who is the Second Person of the Trinity, wholly Divine, wholly human without mixing or confusion, in unity uniquely and inseparably joined.

Consequently, without adopting and knowing these doctrines one does not truly know Jesus Christ except maybe superficially, a peffi faith [Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:3]. Jesus Christ becomes a confused image in a dark opaque shadow.

JoeT

Thanks for posting. Can there be clarification between doctrine and dogma? I see they are both used in the OP. I personally beilve that Marian teachings are dogmas rather than doctrines. Thoughts?
Blessings

 

[JoeT]

Thanks for posting. Can there be clarification between doctrine and dogma? I see they are both used in the OP. I personally beilve that Marian teachings are dogmas rather than doctrines. Thoughts?
Blessings

Sure thing.

Doctrines: Any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful. The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed
Dogma: Doctrine taught by the Church to be believed by all the faithful as part of divine revelation. All dogmas, therefore, are formally revealed truths and promulgated as such by the Church. [Source: Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., Modern Catholic Dictionary]

The Marian teachings are actually both. First in the Traditions of faith, this isn't the first generation to discover the Mother of God, then in the teaching and finally as part divine revelation.

JoeT

 

[BobRyan]

The first is she is the handmaiden of God implying a spousal relationship.

hand·maid
NOUN
archaic

1. a female servant.
   synonyms: attendant, retainer, domestic worker, cleaner, cleaning woman, minion, housemaid...
   

"Spouse" is not a term for handmaid or the other way around as far as I can tell.

 

[prodromos]

hand·maid
NOUN
archaic

1. a female servant.
   synonyms: attendant, retainer, domestic worker, cleaner, cleaning woman, minion, housemaid...
   

"Spouse" is not a term for handmaid or the other way around as far as I can tell.

Agreed. If it was a man in a simliar situation he would say, "behold the servant of the Lord"

 

[disciple Clint]

On recent threads, the conversation turned to the Mother of God, Mary. I contend however that the Catholic Marian Doctrines are not only profitable to knowing Jesus Christ, but also a necessity to our love of the Lord.

St. Augustine once said, and I’ll paraphrase, ‘no one can love what is not known’. [St. Augustine, On the Holy Trinity, X] St. Paul gets more to the point couching it a little differently, “But if any man love God, the same is known by him." [1 Corinthians 8:3]. You might recall from the Magnificat where Mary makes two passionate statements. The first is she is the handmaiden of God implying a spousal relationship. The other is that her soul “magnifies the Lord”.

And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy: As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever." [Luke 1:46-55]​

The four Marian dogmas regarding Mary are the Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, perpetual virginity, and Assumption, I’m not sure if they came in that order. Nevertheless, each of these doctrines ‘magnify’ the Lord who is the Second Person of the Trinity, wholly Divine, wholly human without mixing or confusion, in unity uniquely and inseparably joined.

Consequently, without adopting and knowing these doctrines one does not truly know Jesus Christ except maybe superficially, a peffi faith [Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:3]. Jesus Christ becomes a confused image in a dark opaque shadow.

JoeT

I believe that Assumption of Mary is not R.C. dogma.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Sure thing.

Doctrines: Any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful. The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed
Dogma: Doctrine taught by the Church to be believed by all the faithful as part of divine revelation. All dogmas, therefore, are formally revealed truths and promulgated as such by the Church. [Source: Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., Modern Catholic Dictionary]

The Marian teachings are actually both. First in the Traditions of faith, this isn't the first generation to discover the Mother of God, then in the teaching and finally as part divine revelation.

JoeT

Thanks for sharing. I understand the RCC has a dogmatic position on Mary and it is a belief that " must" be adhered to in order to be a Catholic. We can all agree on the importance of Mary but there are other positions in Christianity that do not elevate her to divine status. She carries no dogmatic or doctrinal purpose in scripture yet remains very important for her role as the mother of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Thanks for engaging!
Blessings.

 

[JoeT]

hand·maid
NOUN
archaic

1. a female servant.
   synonyms: attendant, retainer, domestic worker, cleaner, cleaning woman, minion, housemaid...
   

"Spouse" is not a term for handmaid or the other way around as far as I can tell.

Well that's true, but the relationship wasn't always servile, sometimes it had a familial characteristic. In Sacred Scripture there are at least three examples scriptural examples where the handmaid, a servant was given to the lord of the house to bear seed, i.e. children. In at least one case there was a spousal relationship, likely in all three examples. There is Agar, Sarai's handmaid who ran away from her mistress, told to humble herself and return by an angel. Her seed would be multiplied by multitudes. Eventually, given to Abraham bearing a son. Also, there was Zelpha, Lia’s handmaid given to her husband to bear children, two sons. Lia said her handmaid brought a blessing to her, Aser. Again one more example is Rachel’s handmaid, Bala who was given in marriage. [Cf. Genesis 16; 30].

In each of our examples the handmaid was blessed with children. Hagar had multitudes. The humble Mary was blessed with her Son and all her Church.

JoeT

 

[JoeT]

Thanks for sharing. I understand the RCC has a dogmatic position on Mary and it is a belief that " must" be adhered to in order to be a Catholic.

It is indeed a doctrine Catholics are obliged to believe. It is also a truth all Christians who claim to "believe" are obligated as well. To believe doesn't mean we get to determine our own truth.

We can all agree on the importance of Mary but there are other positions in Christianity that do not elevate her to divine status.

We can only conclude then what is true for one isn't necessary true for another? Does gravity only work astrophysicists? Or, does the truths of gravity work on all?

She carries no dogmatic or doctrinal purpose in scripture yet remains very important for her role as the mother of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

Quite the contrary, she defines, and identifies who and what Christ is. As she says herself in Scripture she "magnifies the Lord". Through Mary we come to know the object of our love.

JoeT

 

[BNR32FAN]

On recent threads, the conversation turned to the Mother of God, Mary. I contend however that the Catholic Marian Doctrines are not only profitable to knowing Jesus Christ, but also a necessity to our love of the Lord.

St. Augustine once said, and I’ll paraphrase, ‘no one can love what is not known’. [St. Augustine, On the Holy Trinity, X] St. Paul gets more to the point couching it a little differently, “But if any man love God, the same is known by him." [1 Corinthians 8:3]. You might recall from the Magnificat where Mary makes two passionate statements. The first is she is the handmaiden of God implying a spousal relationship. The other is that her soul “magnifies the Lord”.

And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior. Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him. He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel his servant, being mindful of his mercy: As he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever." [Luke 1:46-55]​

The four Marian dogmas regarding Mary are the Mother of God, Immaculate Conception, perpetual virginity, and Assumption, I’m not sure if they came in that order. Nevertheless, each of these doctrines ‘magnify’ the Lord who is the Second Person of the Trinity, wholly Divine, wholly human without mixing or confusion, in unity uniquely and inseparably joined.

Consequently, without adopting and knowing these doctrines one does not truly know Jesus Christ except maybe superficially, a peffi faith [Cf. 1 Corinthians 8:3]. Jesus Christ becomes a confused image in a dark opaque shadow.

JoeT

How does Mary’s perpetual virginity magnify The Lord?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Well that's true, but the relationship wasn't always servile, sometimes it was familial characteristic. In Sacred Scripture there are at least three examples scriptural examples where the handmaid, a servant was given to the lord of the house to bear seed, i.e. children. In at least one case there was a spousal relationship, likely in all three examples. There is Agar, Sarai's handmaid who ran away from her mistress, told to humble herself and return by an angel. Her seed would be multiplied by multitudes. Eventually, given to Abraham bearing a son. Also, there was Zelpha, Lia’s handmaid given to her husband to bear children, two sons. Lia said her handmaid brought a blessing to her, Aser. Again one more example is Rachel’s handmaid, Bala who was given in marriage. [Cf. Genesis 16; 30].

In each of our examples the handmaid was blessed with children. Hagar had multitudes. The humble Mary was blessed with her Son and all her Church.

JoeT

“Her church”? Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your usage here. Your referring to “her church” as her being a member of the church not as in a possessive nature, correct? Like I might refer to the church that I attend as “my church” but it doesn’t mean that I am the head of the church or the owner of it. Is that how you intended that term?

 

[JoeT]

I believe that Assumption of Mary is not R.C. dogma.

Pope Pious XII lays out the reasons the doctrine of Mary’s assumption into heaven says the following:

Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.

In order that this, our definition of the bodily Assumption of the Virgin Mary into heaven may be brought to the attention of the universal Church, we desire that this, our Apostolic Letter, should stand for perpetual remembrance, commanding that written copies of it, or even printed copies, signed by the hand of any public notary and bearing the seal of a person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity, should be accorded by all men the same reception they would give to this present letter, were it tendered or shown. [Pope Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus, 1950.]​

Notable, to call into doubt the Assumption of Mary calls into doubt the strength of one’s faith.


JoeT

 

[prodromos]

Well that's true, but the relationship wasn't always servile, sometimes it had a familial characteristic. In Sacred Scripture there are at least three examples scriptural examples where the handmaid, a servant was given to the lord of the house to bear seed, i.e. children. In at least one case there was a spousal relationship, likely in all three examples. There is Agar, Sarai's handmaid who ran away from her mistress, told to humble herself and return by an angel. Her seed would be multiplied by multitudes. Eventually, given to Abraham bearing a son. Also, there was Zelpha, Lia’s handmaid given to her husband to bear children, two sons. Lia said her handmaid brought a blessing to her, Aser. Again one more example is Rachel’s handmaid, Bala who was given in marriage. [Cf. Genesis 16; 30].

In each of our examples the handmaid was blessed with children. Hagar had multitudes. The humble Mary was blessed with her Son and all her Church.

JoeT

Hi Joe,
in each case they remained the handmaid of the wife, not of the husband. So no, "handmaid" does not ever describe a spousal relationship in the Scriptures.

 

[JoeT]

How does Mary’s perpetual virginity magnify The Lord?

There are several ways Mary’s perpetual virginity focuses our attention to who Jesus is and what He is. We declare that Jesus Christ is the Messias wholly God and wholly man. Fleshy things like rabbits beget rabbits, not toads, not birds. When corrupt flesh man begets the image of himself, he gets corrupt flesh. We inherit the absence of original justice that was once a part of man’s inheritance. Thus, men inherit original sin through birth. Mary then being incorruptible receiving the grace of justification at birth, never experiences sin. Consequently, when her Son is born he does not contract original sin.

The Incarnation in the womb of the immaculate Mary gives us hope that we might be re-born sons of God in the promised fulfilled in John 1:12; as believers, "not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:13)

After birth of Christ the “This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it: because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it, and it shall be shut". [Ezechiel 44:2]. Once again identifying our Lord as the King of Israel and the son of David.

We see that without the virgin Mary we can’t see the real nature of the God/man; either we see God with man, or man without God, a mystical object.

 

[JoeT]

Hi Joe,
in each case they remained the handmaid of the wife, not of the husband. So no, "handmaid" does not ever describe a spousal relationship in the Scriptures.

That's a bit strange, because Genesis says that Rachel gave her servant girl in marriage. "
And she gave him Bala in marriage: who, When her husband had gone in unto her, conceived and bore a son" [Genesis 30:4-5]. In my mind, feeble as it might be, when there is marriage there exists family, a husband and a wife, man and woman; in the non-woke world these were called spouses, two united as one. Hence, there is a spousal relationship indicated by the word "handmaid" and the act of God, "overshadowing" Mary; there is the consecrations of the marriage.

JoeT

 

[prodromos]

That's a bit strange, because Genesis says that Rachel gave her servant girl in marriage. "
And she gave him Bala in marriage: who, When her husband had gone in unto her, conceived and bore a son" [Genesis 30:4-5]. In my mind, feeble as it might be, when there is marriage there exists family, a husband and a wife, man and woman; in the non-woke world these were called spouses, two united as one. Hence, there is a spousal relationship indicated by the word "handmaid" and the act of God, "overshadowing" Mary; there is the consecrations of the marriage.

JoeT

Again, Bala was the handmaid of Rachel, not the handmaid of her husband. Handmaid is never a spousal relationship in Scripture and I seriously doubt you will find any Church Father supporting your personal, made up interpretation.

 

[prodromos]

There are several ways Mary’s perpetual virginity focuses our attention to who Jesus is and what He is. We declare that Jesus Christ is the Messias wholly God and wholly man. Fleshy things like rabbits beget rabbits, not toads, not birds. When corrupt flesh man begets the image of himself, he gets corrupt flesh. We inherit the absence of original justice that was once a part of man’s inheritance. Thus, men inherit original sin through birth. Mary then being incorruptible receiving the grace of justification at birth, never experiences sin. Consequently, when her Son is born he does not contract original sin.

If Mary can be conceived without inheriting the fallen nature of her parents then there is no reason that Mary's Son can't also be conceived without inheriting his mother's fallen nature. Thus your own doctrine cancels out the need for Mary to be immaculately conceived.

Hoist on your own petard.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Thus, men inherit original sin through birth. Mary then being incorruptible receiving the grace of justification at birth, never experiences sin. Consequently, when her Son is born he does not contract original sin.

This is an assumption that is not supported by the scriptures nor the majority of apostolic churches. There’s the possibility that she did sin but was cleansed of her sin before Christ was incarnated and the possibility that she did sin, was not cleansed, but it had no effect on Christ since being God He cannot transgress against Himself.

 

[BNR32FAN]

When corrupt flesh man begets the image of himself, he gets corrupt flesh. We inherit the absence of original justice that was once a part of man’s inheritance. Thus, men inherit original sin through birth. Mary then being incorruptible receiving the grace of justification at birth, never experiences sin. Consequently, when her Son is born he does not contract original sin.

We can’t apply all of this to Christ just because it applied to man, there’s no scripture to support any of this applying to Christ. There’s not a single verse in the scriptures that implied that Christ was ever capable of inheriting a sinful nature.

 

[BNR32FAN]

After birth of Christ the “This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it: because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it, and it shall be shut". [Ezechiel 44:2]. Once again identifying our Lord as the King of Israel and the son of David.

Ok let’s continue that passage a bit.

“Then He brought me back by the way of the outer gate of the sanctuary, which faces the east; and it was shut. The Lord said to me, “This gate shall be shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it, for the Lord God of Israel has entered by it; therefore it shall be shut. As for the prince, he shall sit in it as prince to eat bread before the Lord; he shall enter by way of the porch of the gate and shall go out by the same way.””
‭‭Ezekiel‬ ‭44:1-3‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

If this gate refers to Mary’s womb did Christ go out through the same womb He came in from?