Mary Alone

For those deep thinkers out there.

Moderator: tuttle

Post Reply
User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 21663
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: North Texas & Southern California at the beach

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Thunktank » Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:39 pm

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:10 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:04 pm
[…]

1) If maintaining Mary's virginity is the heart of the matter. Then sure. Go for it. But I would contend that Christ's Incarnation, and his humanity, is more to the heart of the matter, which is why a teleportation birth seems to be a shaky foundation to set the stage of the Incarnation. …

[…]
Leaving aside terminological wranglings over "teleportation", the deeper issue seems to be over attributing a "miraculous" character to the Birth. Though I'm not especially knowledgable in this area, I would think that the partisans of this view would, rather than its miraculous character, insist on its "originary" character as being a mode of Birth proper to Man in his original integrity (in his Prelapsarian state). Which is to say, a mode of birth which is natural-though-unfallen — as passing through the birth canal without opening/wounding it — rather than as a miraculous mode which bypasses natural channels. This would also seem to account for Mary's not being subject to labor pains.
Things that make me go hmmmm. . .

Good grief this particular side of the topic is silly. :egor: :lol:

I have visions of ancient desert monks standing in the sun’s rays for a long time thinking this stuff up.

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: Mary Alone

Post by infidel » Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:18 pm

Thunktank wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:39 pm
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:10 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:04 pm
[…]

1) If maintaining Mary's virginity is the heart of the matter. Then sure. Go for it. But I would contend that Christ's Incarnation, and his humanity, is more to the heart of the matter, which is why a teleportation birth seems to be a shaky foundation to set the stage of the Incarnation. …

[…]
Leaving aside terminological wranglings over "teleportation", the deeper issue seems to be over attributing a "miraculous" character to the Birth. Though I'm not especially knowledgable in this area, I would think that the partisans of this view would, rather than its miraculous character, insist on its "originary" character as being a mode of Birth proper to Man in his original integrity (in his Prelapsarian state). Which is to say, a mode of birth which is natural-though-unfallen — as passing through the birth canal without opening/wounding it — rather than as a miraculous mode which bypasses natural channels. This would also seem to account for Mary's not being subject to labor pains.
Things that make me go hmmmm. . .

Good grief this particular side of the topic is silly. :egor: :lol:

I have visions of ancient desert monks standing in the sun’s rays for a long time thinking this stuff up.
It makes total sense in a closed-loop kind of way. Similar to the idea of drinking God's blood to live forever, or bigger objects will fall faster than smaller objects. Total sense if you start with certain givens and reason deductively without ever taking any measurements from reality.
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 21663
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: North Texas & Southern California at the beach

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Thunktank » Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:28 pm

infidel wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:18 pm
Thunktank wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:39 pm
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:10 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:04 pm
[…]

1) If maintaining Mary's virginity is the heart of the matter. Then sure. Go for it. But I would contend that Christ's Incarnation, and his humanity, is more to the heart of the matter, which is why a teleportation birth seems to be a shaky foundation to set the stage of the Incarnation. …

[…]
Leaving aside terminological wranglings over "teleportation", the deeper issue seems to be over attributing a "miraculous" character to the Birth. Though I'm not especially knowledgable in this area, I would think that the partisans of this view would, rather than its miraculous character, insist on its "originary" character as being a mode of Birth proper to Man in his original integrity (in his Prelapsarian state). Which is to say, a mode of birth which is natural-though-unfallen — as passing through the birth canal without opening/wounding it — rather than as a miraculous mode which bypasses natural channels. This would also seem to account for Mary's not being subject to labor pains.
Things that make me go hmmmm. . .

Good grief this particular side of the topic is silly. :egor: :lol:

I have visions of ancient desert monks standing in the sun’s rays for a long time thinking this stuff up.
It makes total sense in a closed-loop kind of way. Similar to the idea of drinking God's blood to live forever, or bigger objects will fall faster than smaller objects. Total sense if you start with certain givens and reason deductively without ever taking any measurements from reality.
Sure it makes sense. After all, any measurement is possible in the prelapsarian state. :wink:

User avatar
durangopipe
Under-secretary to the Minister of Pipe Breaking
Under-secretary to the Minister of Pipe Breaking
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm
Location: Southwest Colorado

Re: Mary Alone

Post by durangopipe » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:50 pm

This concise summary might be helpful for Protestants unfamiliar with Catholic theological tradition regarding the Virgin Birth:

http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/2012/ ... tradition/
. . . be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. Ephesians 4:32 (NKJV)

The most improper job of any man, even saints, is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity.. J.R.R. Tolkien

2017 Morley - Outstanding BRATASS of the Year

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 37303
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:44 am

Thunktank wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:39 pm
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:10 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:04 pm
[…]

1) If maintaining Mary's virginity is the heart of the matter. Then sure. Go for it. But I would contend that Christ's Incarnation, and his humanity, is more to the heart of the matter, which is why a teleportation birth seems to be a shaky foundation to set the stage of the Incarnation. …

[…]
Leaving aside terminological wranglings over "teleportation", the deeper issue seems to be over attributing a "miraculous" character to the Birth. Though I'm not especially knowledgable in this area, I would think that the partisans of this view would, rather than its miraculous character, insist on its "originary" character as being a mode of Birth proper to Man in his original integrity (in his Prelapsarian state). Which is to say, a mode of birth which is natural-though-unfallen — as passing through the birth canal without opening/wounding it — rather than as a miraculous mode which bypasses natural channels. This would also seem to account for Mary's not being subject to labor pains.
Things that make me go hmmmm. . .

Good grief this particular side of the topic is silly. :egor: :lol:

I have visions of ancient desert monks standing in the sun’s rays for a long time thinking this stuff up.
I don't know about the Desert Monks, but that is often how I imagine wosbald.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 4738
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:15 am

Del wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:42 pm
Joshoowah wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:30 pm
Del wrote:
The ancient understanding of virginity was "opening the womb." The modern definition is confined to sexual innocence. Since Jesus and Mary and the Gospels were so long ago, we have to open ourselves to the ancient understanding.
I understand the Catholic doctrine of Immaculate Conception, but I do not understand where this idea of the ancient understanding of virginity meaning "opening the womb."

I am genuinely seeking a starting point on this thought because this has never came up in my Church Father reading (I have them all) nor my cultural studies of the Ancient Near East or the Roman first-century.

I do know the term virgin had a broader meaning, but I've just never seen the reference you used anywhere. I'm going to go through my Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew lexicons later to see if I missed something.

Sent from my CPH1723 using Tapatalk
Here is a brief segment from my Mariology textbook. Note the reference from St. Augustine.
Mary’s Virginity in the Birth

It was also fitting that Christ Himself leave intact that bodily integrity of His Mother when He came forth from the womb, to give further evidence that she was the fulfillment of the figure in the Old Testament of a garden enclosed and a fountain sealed (Song 4:12). Thus He came forth through closed doors, much as on the day of His Resurrection, in His glorious body, He came through the closed doors of the Cenacle, locked for fear of the Jews. In a homily on the Nativity, St. Augustine made this comparison:

"Why, then, could He, who as a grown man was able to enter through closed portals, not pass through incorrupt members as an infant?. . . If faith believes that God was born in the flesh, it does not doubt that the two miracles are possible to God, namely, that though the doors of the house were closed, He manifested His mature body to those within the house, and that as an infant He came forth, a spouse from His bride-chamber, that is, from the virginal womb, leaving His Mother‘s integrity inviolate."150

In this way, Mary did not suffer the pains of childbirth as other mothers do who are subject to the penalties of original sin.
Furthermore, the pain of labor in childbirth is a penalty of original sin, as seen in Gen 3:16, in which God said to Eve: "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children." It was fitting that Mary, who was exempt from all stain of original sin, be exempt from the pains of childbirth in the birth of her Son.

150 St. Augustine, Sermon 191.1 on the Nativity, trans. Mary S. Muldowney, in Saint Augustine: Sermons on the Liturgical Seasons, series: Fathers of the Church, vol. 38 (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1959), 29.
I have more references, if you want to dig further.
I remember that instance in Augustine, but it still does not answer my question. What else you got that I can look into? Looking forward to it.
"For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose?" Philippians 1:21-22

ImageImage

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 37303
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:22 am

Joshoowah wrote:
Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:15 am

I remember that instance in Augustine, but it still does not answer my question. What else you got that I can look into? Looking forward to it.
durangopipe's link above has a long list of references in the Early Church Fathers.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
Jester
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:25 am

I watched a debate on YouTube that covers a lot of what is discussed here. Sadly, when I finished watching I looked up the Catholic debater Gerry Matatics. It appears that he has been denounced by several sects of the Catholic church and even banned from other speaking events. My question is would you (Del and Wos) consider this debate valid? Can you direct me to another similar debate on this subject?
Pumpkin Ale is more American than apple pie! -Tuttle

We almost solved the Mary issue. -FredS

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 19148
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Fri Apr 27, 2018 9:05 am

+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:25 am
I watched a debate on YouTube that covers a lot of what is discussed here. Sadly, when I finished watching I looked up the Catholic debater Gerry Matatics. It appears that he has been denounced by several sects of the Catholic church and even banned from other speaking events. My question is would you (Del and Wos) consider this debate valid? Can you direct me to another similar debate on this subject?
Well, it certainly can't be Catholically "invalid". That is, not unless he was specifically arguing against Catholic dogmatics.

Otherwise, it would still be Catholically valid, even if he did a crappy job. It would be validly crappy.
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

Post Reply