Mary Alone

For those deep thinkers out there.
Post Reply
User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm

tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:38 am
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:44 pm
During those three days as Christ lay dead in the tomb, there was only one who still believed. Only one who fully understood that His death was a necessary and willing sacrifice, so that we could all participate in His resurrection.

For these three days, the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsisted in just one person: His Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Are you saying that Mary's full understanding of his necessary death, willing sacrifice, and forthcoming resurrection is what qualified her to be "the entire Church of Jesus Christ" during that time?
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:40 pm
There are the practical effects of living with Jesus for 33 years, and having experienced the miracles of His conception and birth.

But there is a supernatural grace at work, as well. Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit revealed Himself in her when she consented to receive Christ for the world.

The Apostles had to wait until Pentecost before they could comprehend the Resurrection, after they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit. They were finally able to understand what Mary knew, all along.
Did the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsist in Mary for those three days, or until Pentecost?
Scripture tells us that the Apostles saw the empty tomb, and believed. At least, this was certainly so for Peter and John. Thomas was the last to believe, demanding that Jesus appear before him so that Thomas could touch His wounds.

In the sense that "Believers = The Church," thus Mary's solitude of faith was just for the 3 days.

Yet Scripture also tells us that the Apostles did not comprehend the magnitude of what Christ had done until Pentecost.
Jester wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:14 pm
Mary had an amazing grasp that she needed Christ. Not as a son but a personal relationship with the creator of the universe who could free her from sin and the wrath of God.
That is what we mean by the Immaculate Conception. We don't see clearly, and we don't think clearly, because our fallen human nature. Mary was preserved from those effects of original sin, so that she could see the spiritual reality clearly and understand perfectly -- as perfectly as Adam and Eve did.

Adam and Eve were not fallen when they disobeyed -- and that is why their disobedience stained all of humanity.

Mary was restored to this original perfection, so that she could be a fitting Mother to the Savior -- and this is why her "Yes" was able to receive salvation for all the world.

And this is also why her own suffering was joined so perfectly with her Son's. Simeon prophesied it would be so.... Luke 2:35.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 24953
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Mary Alone

Post by FredS » Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:56 pm

Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm
. . .Mary was restored to this original perfection, so that she could be a fitting Mother to the Savior -- and this is why her "Yes" was able to receive salvation for all the world . . .
From a Catholic POV or teaching, was Mary pure before the angel visited her, or was she cleansed at that time in preparation for her call? This is interesting to me as the rest of us have had to accept Christ and I wonder if she also had to accept Him even before she could become the perfect vessel.

As a Protestant, it's easier for me to accept that she was purified by Christ (prior to conception) just as I've been, than to accept that she somehow stayed blameless. We're taught that there is only one who ever lived blameless. (Not that something being easy for me to accept has any bearing whatsoever on the actions of the Godhead.)
Last edited by FredS on Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:00 pm

Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm

Jester wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:14 pm
Mary had an amazing grasp that she needed Christ. Not as a son but a personal relationship with the creator of the universe who could free her from sin and the wrath of God.
That is what we mean by the Immaculate Conception. We don't see clearly, and we don't think clearly, because our fallen human nature. Mary was preserved from those effects of original sin, so that she could see the spiritual reality clearly and understand perfectly -- as perfectly as Adam and Eve did.

Adam and Eve were not fallen when they disobeyed -- and that is why their disobedience stained all of humanity.

Mary was restored to this original perfection, so that she could be a fitting Mother to the Savior -- and this is why her "Yes" was able to receive salvation for all the world.

And this is also why her own suffering was joined so perfectly with her Son's. Simeon prophesied it would be so.... Luke 2:35.
I don't think that what I said is what you mean by Immaculate Conception. What I said implied that Mary was a sinner in need of a Savior. What I said implied that Mary also was under penalty and the wrath of God.

We didn't need Mary's "yes" in order to receive salvation. You are giving us a Jesus+Mary gospel right now and I won't have it.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16187
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:04 pm

Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:38 am
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:44 pm
During those three days as Christ lay dead in the tomb, there was only one who still believed. Only one who fully understood that His death was a necessary and willing sacrifice, so that we could all participate in His resurrection.

For these three days, the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsisted in just one person: His Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Are you saying that Mary's full understanding of his necessary death, willing sacrifice, and forthcoming resurrection is what qualified her to be "the entire Church of Jesus Christ" during that time?
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:40 pm
There are the practical effects of living with Jesus for 33 years, and having experienced the miracles of His conception and birth.

But there is a supernatural grace at work, as well. Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit revealed Himself in her when she consented to receive Christ for the world.

The Apostles had to wait until Pentecost before they could comprehend the Resurrection, after they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit. They were finally able to understand what Mary knew, all along.
Did the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsist in Mary for those three days, or until Pentecost?
Scripture tells us that the Apostles saw the empty tomb, and believed. At least, this was certainly so for Peter and John. Thomas was the last to believe, demanding that Jesus appear before him so that Thomas could touch His wounds.

In the sense that "Believers = The Church," thus Mary's solitude of faith was just for the 3 days.

Yet Scripture also tells us that the Apostles did not comprehend the magnitude of what Christ had done until Pentecost.
Ok. We're in agreement, insofar as the Apostles didn't have the ability to comprehend the full magnitude of what Christ had done until Pentecost. Although I don't know if we can know that with 100% accuracy. Perhaps they did comprehend it, but were unable to really do anything about it until the Spirit was given to them. And there's an argument that could be made that the birth of the Church didn't happen until Pentecost...but I digress.

I still am interested in your statement that for three days the Church subsisted in only Mary for three days. I want to look at this from two angles:

First, what about the harrowing of Hell? I'm a little shaky on my Catholic doctrines (as always) but isn't it precisely those three days in which Christ descended to the realm of the dead in order to save the righteous who had died before? I would assume these souls were quite aware of Christ's sacrifice and forthcoming resurrection as Christ was proclaiming it? If this is the case is Mary really alone? And what of the thief on the cross? (I foresee that one might not include these righteous dead folk into what we call "The Church". Is that the case?)

Second, and more to my initial question, I'm still hung up on Mary's understanding which gives her status as the lone member of the Church during the three days. If we're going to say that the Church of Jesus Christ wasn't born (but what, announced?) on Pentecost, and that Mary alone was the single "member" of the Church (on earth) during the three days, then we must somehow equate her knowledge with her status.

My problem is this: Jesus told his disciples that the Father has given them to him and whoever the Father gives him, he will in no way cast out. So even if the disciples scattered, or cursed and denied him during this time, are we to say that Jesus, for those three days, let go of them? Was their salvation or inclusion in the Church based on their understanding or on what Christ accomplished? I think your claim that the Church subsided in Mary alone for those three days holds some serious implications regarding the ecclesiology and soteriology.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 24953
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Mary Alone

Post by FredS » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:05 pm

oh Jester. . .Just because you won't have it doesn't mean Del's not going to give it
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:43 pm

FredS wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:05 pm
oh Jester. . .Just because you won't have it doesn't mean Del's not going to give it
:lol: Just sharing the Good News!

It's not personal... at least not to me. I know how shocking this is to traditions that have rejected Mary and the aspects of Scripture and salvation that God has illuminated by her.
FredS wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:56 pm
Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm
. . .Mary was restored to this original perfection, so that she could be a fitting Mother to the Savior -- and this is why her "Yes" was able to receive salvation for all the world . . .
From a Catholic POV or teaching, was Mary pure before the angel visited her, or was she cleansed at that time in preparation for her call? This is interesting to me as the rest of us have had to accept Christ and I wonder if she also had to accept Him even before she could become the perfect vessel.

As a Protestant, it's easier for me to accept that she was purified by Christ (prior to conception) just as I've been, than to accept that she somehow stayed blameless. We're taught that there is only one who ever lived blameless. (Not that something being easy for me to accept has any bearing whatsoever on the actions of the Godhead.)
By "Immaculate Conception," we mean that Mary was purified from the beginning.

She still had to accept Christ -- but she was able to accept Him more perfectly that we can. She was able to accept Christ for the whole world. All of creation paused as we waited to hear Mary say "Yes" to receiving the savior into the world for us, in Luke 1:38.

Remember that Adam and Eve were "blameless," until they sinned. Mary was the long-awaited "do-over."

This is not to mean that Mary didn't need a savior! It's just that Mary needed to be saved in a different way, so that there could be one who could freely say "Let it be done to me, as you have said" -- in a way that completely undid Eve's decision to disobey.

Sin is simply a decision to disobey God. The New Eve needed to be as blameless as the old Eve -- before the first sin at the Tree.
By her obedience, Mary shared in the suffering of the New Adam as He conquered sin -- by hanging on a Tree.

I am blown away by the genius of God's divine symmetry -- how the divine plan of salvation came together so perfectly over thousands of years.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
Jester
Brother of Tuttle
Brother of Tuttle
Posts: 2695
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Pleasant Hill, MO

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:58 pm

My jaw has shattered upon the floor.
FIGHT LAUGH FEAST

“Liberal Christianity” may be more appealing to the masses than “conservative Christianity,” -TNLawPiper

I am become meme,
Destroyer of shorts -Elon

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 24953
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Mary Alone

Post by FredS » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:18 pm

Thanks for that Del.

The tuttles would do well to remember that they're not Catholic for a reason. It's a whole different thing than the thing they know. Also remember our Catholic friends here don't presume to speak on behalf of the church (though hugo often wraps Del's knuckles for seeming to), but on the churches teaching and tradition based on their experience. To the extent they choose to share, they're sharing their story. It's no great surprise it's not the same as yours.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
JohnnyMcPiperson
I want one of those
I want one of those
Posts: 8929
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Near the Sunken Road, VA

Re: Mary Alone

Post by JohnnyMcPiperson » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:29 pm

Mary gets a big atta girl from me! I like Mary, she seems like she would have been an interesting person to meet, but Christ was still the one on the cross, and I’m pretty sure if she was here she would not accept the praise, but would redirect to her Son, you know the one who conquered death.
Cob Pipes Matter! The trophy was too big

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:40 pm

tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:04 pm
Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 1:32 pm
tuttle wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:38 am
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:44 pm
During those three days as Christ lay dead in the tomb, there was only one who still believed. Only one who fully understood that His death was a necessary and willing sacrifice, so that we could all participate in His resurrection.

For these three days, the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsisted in just one person: His Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Are you saying that Mary's full understanding of his necessary death, willing sacrifice, and forthcoming resurrection is what qualified her to be "the entire Church of Jesus Christ" during that time?
Del wrote:
Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:40 pm
There are the practical effects of living with Jesus for 33 years, and having experienced the miracles of His conception and birth.

But there is a supernatural grace at work, as well. Scripture tells us that the Holy Spirit revealed Himself in her when she consented to receive Christ for the world.

The Apostles had to wait until Pentecost before they could comprehend the Resurrection, after they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit. They were finally able to understand what Mary knew, all along.
Did the entire Church of Jesus Christ subsist in Mary for those three days, or until Pentecost?
Scripture tells us that the Apostles saw the empty tomb, and believed. At least, this was certainly so for Peter and John. Thomas was the last to believe, demanding that Jesus appear before him so that Thomas could touch His wounds.

In the sense that "Believers = The Church," thus Mary's solitude of faith was just for the 3 days.

Yet Scripture also tells us that the Apostles did not comprehend the magnitude of what Christ had done until Pentecost.
Ok. We're in agreement, insofar as the Apostles didn't have the ability to comprehend the full magnitude of what Christ had done until Pentecost. Although I don't know if we can know that with 100% accuracy. Perhaps they did comprehend it, but were unable to really do anything about it until the Spirit was given to them. And there's an argument that could be made that the birth of the Church didn't happen until Pentecost...but I digress.

I still am interested in your statement that for three days the Church subsisted in only Mary for three days. I want to look at this from two angles:

First, what about the harrowing of Hell? I'm a little shaky on my Catholic doctrines (as always) but isn't it precisely those three days in which Christ descended to the realm of the dead in order to save the righteous who had died before? I would assume these souls were quite aware of Christ's sacrifice and forthcoming resurrection as Christ was proclaiming it? If this is the case is Mary really alone? And what of the thief on the cross? (I foresee that one might not include these righteous dead folk into what we call "The Church". Is that the case?)
Good point.... The angels and saints are part of the Church. Sort of ignoring all of Church Triumphant here.

The notion of "Mary Alone" is not a dogma. It is a thought for reflection. It seems very likely that there was only one convinced, believing, fully trusting member among the living human Church during those three days of despair -- and that was Mary.

This is very significant to those Christians who have a relationship with Mary -- it colors our experience of the Triduum, as we stand with Mary at the foot of the cross and wait with Mary for news of the Resurrection.

This is really why I started this thread. Not to push a dogma, but just to share a bit of the Triduum as my family lives it.

tuttle wrote:Second, and more to my initial question, I'm still hung up on Mary's understanding which gives her status as the lone member of the Church during the three days. If we're going to say that the Church of Jesus Christ wasn't born (but what, announced?) on Pentecost, and that Mary alone was the single "member" of the Church (on earth) during the three days, then we must somehow equate her knowledge with her status.
I like the ways that you are thinking here!

It makes sense to me that Mary was singular (as always) in having received the fullness of the Holy Spirit before Pentecost. Mary was in the Upper Room with the Apostles that day... but as the Tongues of Fire embraced them, she is the only who might have heard the Spirit say, "Hello again, most favored one!"

We could say that the Church was pregnant and gestating during the ministry of Jesus.... and then bursting forth into the world as a new birth on Pentecost.
tuttle wrote:My problem is this: Jesus told his disciples that the Father has given them to him and whoever the Father gives him, he will in no way cast out. So even if the disciples scattered, or cursed and denied him during this time, are we to say that Jesus, for those three days, let go of them? Was their salvation or inclusion in the Church based on their understanding or on what Christ accomplished? I think your claim that the Church subsided in Mary alone for those three days holds some serious implications regarding the ecclesiology and soteriology.
We have enjoyed many discussions about Church and Salvation. The lines are clearly drawn. I have nothing new to offer here.

Catholics [and Protestants of the Arminian/Wesleyan/Holiness traditions] see Church and Salvation as described by Jesus, such as in the parable of the Prodigal Son. The Father continues to call us back, always ready to forgive, always hoping to restore us to His Church.

But we can leave Him as the Prodigal Son did, and we often do. Hell is heavy with Christians who turned from Christ and fell into sin. Starting with Judas, I suppose. Nothing can separate us from God's steadfast love... but we can be tempted to turn away by our own choices.

On the other hand, there is Calvin's dogma of Perseverance of the Saints, Luther's notion that one can be both a saint and a sinner -- at the same time! -- and a portion of American Evangelicals who believe in Once Saved, Always Saved.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
Gabriel
Enraged by S'mores
Enraged by S'mores
Posts: 12260
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: central IL

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Gabriel » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 pm

Ah, Del in the Theology Forum. It has been way too long since I've eavesdropped on one of those discussions. Good times. No sarcasm, I'm enjoying this one.
Sola Deo Gloria

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:55 pm

JohnnyMcPiperson wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:29 pm
Mary gets a big atta girl from me! I like Mary, she seems like she would have been an interesting person to meet, but Christ was still the one on the cross, and I’m pretty sure if she was here she would not accept the praise, but would redirect to her Son, you know the one who conquered death.
Always pointing us to her Son, yes! But we don't need Mary for that -- We have the Church and the Scripture to point us to Christ, if He needs pointing out.

Mary does visit here often (no doubt, by her Son's permission and direction), and she speaks clearly about her concerns for us.

We just commemorated the 100th anniversary of the Fatima apparitions, which are still relevant today. In 1917 she prophesied the end of WWI, the coming of WWII, the (attempted?) assassination of a Pope, and the end of the Soviet U***n (if we dedicated Russia to her care). She warned that souls were falling into Hell "like snowflakes" due to sins of sexual impurity. She begged us to pray and make reparations.

Maybe we ought to pay attention? Those prophecies of wars -- and the bloodless end of the Soviet U***n -- grabbed my attention. We could have avoided WWII and ended the Cold War decades sooner, if we have only listened to Mary!
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:56 pm

Gabriel wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 pm
Ah, Del in the Theology Forum. It has been way too long since I've eavesdropped on one of those discussions. Good times. No sarcasm, I'm enjoying this one.
You are coming to Chicago, right? Bringing the wife and maybe some kids?

JMG is gonna be there!
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm

FredS wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:18 pm
Thanks for that Del.

The tuttles would do well to remember that they're not Catholic for a reason. It's a whole different thing than the thing they know. Also remember our Catholic friends here don't presume to speak on behalf of the church (though hugo often wraps Del's knuckles for seeming to), but on the churches teaching and tradition based on their experience. To the extent they choose to share, they're sharing their story. It's no great surprise it's not the same as yours.
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
"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

TNLawPiper
1-800-LAW-DAWG
1-800-LAW-DAWG
Posts: 19850
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:00 pm

Re: Mary Alone

Post by TNLawPiper » Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:45 am

According to the Nicene Creed, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Christ was incarnate of the Virgin Mary. In other words, He became man from her humanity. That line, as much as any, strikes me when I hear it. Truly she was blessed among women.
Stat crux dum volvitur orbis.

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16187
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Tue Apr 03, 2018 7:05 am

I appreciate your responses. You're right, we've discussed this from other angles before, and though I often enjoy the back and forth, here really isn't the place to do it. But I do want to engage with this, because it's relevant to the topic:
Del wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:40 pm
The notion of "Mary Alone" is not a dogma. It is a thought for reflection. It seems very likely that there was only one convinced, believing, fully trusting member among the living human Church during those three days of despair -- and that was Mary.
I actually can get fully on board with this. I wasn't thinking it was a dogma, but things don't have to be dogma to influence our theologies, which was what I was tossing out there.

But as a reflection, that Mary was the lone fully trusting member of the living church there at the cross, I have no qualms. I don't know if we can be assured that such was the case, but that said, we're not assured that it wasn't the case either. Because of what we do and don't read in the Scriptures about those days and who Christ considered to be his followers, and the implications of what He means by "it is accomplished", I have a much easier time thinking of Mary as one of the lone figures who still believed during those three days than I do thinking of her as the one lone figure that made up the entirety of the Church on earth in those days. I'm glad you find edification in it.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Del
Sneaky Snusser
Sneaky Snusser
Posts: 43986
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:24 am

Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
FredS wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:18 pm
Thanks for that Del.

The tuttles would do well to remember that they're not Catholic for a reason. It's a whole different thing than the thing they know. Also remember our Catholic friends here don't presume to speak on behalf of the church (though hugo often wraps Del's knuckles for seeming to), but on the churches teaching and tradition based on their experience. To the extent they choose to share, they're sharing their story. It's no great surprise it's not the same as yours.
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
My thanks to you and tuttle, to FredS and to all who enjoying this thread.

In most studies of the Old Testament, we are taught that God is constant in His love for Israel.... always calling His People back. Chastising them with His love, shaping and sharpening them until -- in the fullness of time -- there was a faithful remnant of a Nation who were ready to receive the Messiah for the salvation of the whole world.

We have all learned this, right?

In Catholic bible studies, this development is brought to a point: within that nation which was prepared to receive the Messiah, there were a couple of individual persons who were especially prepared by God so that the world could receive Christ. One was John the Baptist. The other one was Mary.

The opening chapters of Luke's gospel, in particular, fit like a jigsaw puzzle with the jagged edges of Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of the Messiah.
G.K. Chesterton — 'It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.'

User avatar
wosbald
Lonergan Fan Club President
Lonergan Fan Club President
Posts: 23511
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am

+JMJ+
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16187
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
+JMJ+
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
wosbald
Lonergan Fan Club President
Lonergan Fan Club President
Posts: 23511
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:00 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 am
Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:21 pm
Del touches on something within Classical Christianity that I believe, or at least think, has long been forgotten in the Protestant tradition, that is, Mary representing Eve and Jesus Adam in the "new creation." Just as both genders were part of Creation's fall, both are part of its redemption. It's nothing new, really, as Augustine, Ignatius, and Athanasius all touch on these themes. Now, I'm not fully in tune with the Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, but I am tracking and in general agreement with the premise of it. Mary is an integral part of the Incarnation that cannot be forgotten or swept over, if we're to have a holistic biblical theology. Genesis-to-Revelation, it's all a creation narrative, harkening back to that original failure.
I really think that you hit the nail squarely on the head back on the first page, and I've wondering if anyone would develop it.
back on page 1, Joshoowah wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 2:20 am
[…]

… I point this out to say that even with a direct revelation from God there can be doubt and questioning. It is what makes the action of "faith" so unique as well as difficult.
Faith seen as "being faithful". As "action" (greek: ergon, ἔργον).

Wiktionary: ἔργον. Defined as "1. deed, doing, action" or as "2. labor, work, task".

Strong's: G2041 - ἔργον. KJV Translation Count — Total: 176x
The KJV translates Strong's G2041 in the following manner: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x), labour (1x).

There's a whole lot implied here vis-à-vis Mary, if faith is seen as "action", and how this relates to her "Yes" and whether (or not, as Jester protested) we needed it. It would seem to immediately imply that there is human work involved precisely in the Incarnation itself. That the Incarnation, itself, is humanly-participatory work/action.
I may be vastly oversimplifying things here, but I think the contention isn't that Mary, in faith, said "Yes", but that Protestants would say that Mary's "Yes" is submissive while Catholics would say that Mary's "Yes" is permissive.
What we're really talking about though, is whether faith, as Josh suggested, is a "being faithful". Whether faith is an action. A work.

And if being faithful is a work, then where is the work in "submission"? And if there is no work, then would that make the Protestant Mary faithless?

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

Post Reply