Mary Alone

For those deep thinkers out there.

Moderator: tuttle

Post Reply
User avatar
Jester
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:58 pm

Gabriel wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:57 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:34 pm
Strange that this home cooking has given me a dicky-doo ....
What the what?
My gut hangs out further than my dicky-doo. :lol:
Pumpkin Ale is more American than apple pie! -Tuttle

"O Christmas Tree is going to be a dirge in his home this year I fear."

We almost solved the Mary issue. -FredS

User avatar
FredS
Really, really likes watching kids fish.
Really, really likes watching kids fish.
Posts: 21419
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Mary Alone

Post by FredS » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:18 pm

Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:58 pm
Gabriel wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:57 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:34 pm
Strange that this home cooking has given me a dicky-doo ....
What the what?
My gut hangs out further than my dicky-doo. :lol:
Similar to Dunlop disease.
"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
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 1:10 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jester » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:26 pm

FredS wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:18 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:58 pm
Gabriel wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:57 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:34 pm
Strange that this home cooking has given me a dicky-doo ....
What the what?
My gut hangs out further than my dicky-doo. :lol:
Similar to Dunlop disease.
What the what?
Pumpkin Ale is more American than apple pie! -Tuttle

"O Christmas Tree is going to be a dirge in his home this year I fear."

We almost solved the Mary issue. -FredS

User avatar
John-Boy
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
Posts: 32991
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by John-Boy » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:28 pm

Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:26 pm
FredS wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:18 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:58 pm
Gabriel wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:57 pm
Jester wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:34 pm
Strange that this home cooking has given me a dicky-doo ....
What the what?
My gut hangs out further than my dicky-doo. :lol:
Similar to Dunlop disease.
What the what?
I think that's when your gut donlopped over yer belt.
Praying - coco
Sometimes memes can be helpful as well as humorous - Jocose
Yer mom is kindhearted and well respected in her community - JMG
And when I am sitting on my new saddle, I will know that my weight is resting upon the collective minds of CPS - GaryinVa

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 13202
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm

wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:36 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:38 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
First, I'm not doing anything here, except pointing out the fact of how things went down. Everyone who has access to Luke chapter 1 can confirm this. What I said above--that the word to Mary was not a request, but a proclamation--is the Holy Spirit inspired documented way it happened.

So in reality, your beef about 'holy rape of the soul' isn't with me. It's with Luke and his Inspiration.
Point is that you can (and furthermore, should) maintain that the Angelic Salutation is proclamative/declarative* without having to parlay this into a making of the Annunciation Narrative into a narrative of violence (i.e. a narrative of rape). This should be a common-sense, "first clue" that something is wrong with the superimposed theology. And the fact that (as I alluded earlier to Coco) there is an impulse to divert the convo back to abstract theological ground might indicate a nervousness with respect to how ugly and distorting a picture Monergism/Total Depravity forces to be painted of the Biblical Narrative.
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. As I said, and as Del put forward, there is precedence throughout Scripture that this is how God has operated in achieving his will. I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison to how (thus far) Catholic doctrine (or interpretation?) is interpreting the story. Again, if you want to read that as a narrative of violence, then not only do you have a beef with how the Scriptures tell the tale, but you should (I assume) read all of the other instances of God proclaiming > human acting in faith or unbelief > God accomplishing, also as narratives of violence.
Christmas is Yule, dummies! We're doing the same thing, just better!

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

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 37688
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:43 pm

tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:36 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:38 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
First, I'm not doing anything here, except pointing out the fact of how things went down. Everyone who has access to Luke chapter 1 can confirm this. What I said above--that the word to Mary was not a request, but a proclamation--is the Holy Spirit inspired documented way it happened.

So in reality, your beef about 'holy rape of the soul' isn't with me. It's with Luke and his Inspiration.
Point is that you can (and furthermore, should) maintain that the Angelic Salutation is proclamative/declarative* without having to parlay this into a making of the Annunciation Narrative into a narrative of violence (i.e. a narrative of rape). This should be a common-sense, "first clue" that something is wrong with the superimposed theology. And the fact that (as I alluded earlier to Coco) there is an impulse to divert the convo back to abstract theological ground might indicate a nervousness with respect to how ugly and distorting a picture Monergism/Total Depravity forces to be painted of the Biblical Narrative.
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. As I said, and as Del put forward, there is precedence throughout Scripture that this is how God has operated in achieving his will. I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison to how (thus far) Catholic doctrine (or interpretation?) is interpreting the story. Again, if you want to read that as a narrative of violence, then not only do you have a beef with how the Scriptures tell the tale, but you should (I assume) read all of the other instances of God proclaiming > human acting in faith or unbelief > God accomplishing, also as narratives of violence.
We could read Scripture with an eye towards God's will being violent and irresistible, but that doesn't end well.

We celebrate the gifts and grace and salvation which are offered to those who freely and willingly cooperate with God's plan. Mary stands as the best example, above all others.

For Apostolic Christians, Obedience is a virtue. This is why monks and nuns take vows of obedience.... because they seek holiness and intimate relationship with God. (Mr. Calvin called them fools.)
"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
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24182
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Skip » Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:50 pm

Del wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:43 pm
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:36 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:38 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
First, I'm not doing anything here, except pointing out the fact of how things went down. Everyone who has access to Luke chapter 1 can confirm this. What I said above--that the word to Mary was not a request, but a proclamation--is the Holy Spirit inspired documented way it happened.

So in reality, your beef about 'holy rape of the soul' isn't with me. It's with Luke and his Inspiration.
Point is that you can (and furthermore, should) maintain that the Angelic Salutation is proclamative/declarative* without having to parlay this into a making of the Annunciation Narrative into a narrative of violence (i.e. a narrative of rape). This should be a common-sense, "first clue" that something is wrong with the superimposed theology. And the fact that (as I alluded earlier to Coco) there is an impulse to divert the convo back to abstract theological ground might indicate a nervousness with respect to how ugly and distorting a picture Monergism/Total Depravity forces to be painted of the Biblical Narrative.
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. As I said, and as Del put forward, there is precedence throughout Scripture that this is how God has operated in achieving his will. I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison to how (thus far) Catholic doctrine (or interpretation?) is interpreting the story. Again, if you want to read that as a narrative of violence, then not only do you have a beef with how the Scriptures tell the tale, but you should (I assume) read all of the other instances of God proclaiming > human acting in faith or unbelief > God accomplishing, also as narratives of violence.
We could read Scripture with an eye towards God's will being violent and irresistible, but that doesn't end well.

We celebrate the gifts and grace and salvation which are offered to those who freely and willingly cooperate with God's plan. Mary stands as the best example, above all others.

For Apostolic Christians, Obedience is a virtue. This is why monks and nuns take vows of obedience.... because they seek holiness and intimate relationship with God. (Mr. Calvin called them fools.)
By their fruits shall thee know them...
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
coco
Uniquely Duggish
Uniquely Duggish
Posts: 28685
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by coco » Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:29 pm

I have never had a pepperoni roll. :(
"Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a cob with a forever lucite stem." (Pipverbs 1:1)
"No more signatures that quote other CPS members." - Thunk

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 35767
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by UncleBob » Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:38 pm

coco wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:29 pm
I have never had a pepperoni roll. :(
This is both sad and good, I guess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pod4jIKT_kA
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 19393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 13202
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:51 pm

wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
Since when are the use of the words ''submit' or 'submissive' an indication of violence being done? Mary herself said she was a servant of the Lord. Servants submit to their masters...more than that we are called by the apostles over and over to submit ourselves to God and to those in authority over us. Mary's submission to the word of the Lord was an act of faith. This isn't some abstract theological system trying to shoehorn itself into the narrative. That was basically my point to begin with. I was comparing the actual story, Mary's submissiveness, to what I believe actually is a shoehorned system; the idea of Mary's permissiveness and the angel's proclamation being a request.

How you perceive my explanation of Mary's servant-obedience as 'soul rape' escapes me. :confused:
Christmas is Yule, dummies! We're doing the same thing, just better!

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

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 19393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:51 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
Since when are the use of the words ''submit' or 'submissive' an indication of violence being done? Mary herself said she was a servant of the Lord. Servants submit to their masters...more than that we are called by the apostles over and over to submit ourselves to God and to those in authority over us. Mary's submission to the word of the Lord was an act of faith. This isn't some abstract theological system trying to shoehorn itself into the narrative. That was basically my point to begin with. I was comparing the actual story, Mary's submissiveness, to what I believe actually is a shoehorned system; the idea of Mary's permissiveness and the angel's proclamation being a request.

How you perceive my explanation of Mary's servant-obedience as 'soul rape' escapes me. :confused:
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
John-Boy
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
Posts: 32991
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by John-Boy » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:49 pm

wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:51 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
Since when are the use of the words ''submit' or 'submissive' an indication of violence being done? Mary herself said she was a servant of the Lord. Servants submit to their masters...more than that we are called by the apostles over and over to submit ourselves to God and to those in authority over us. Mary's submission to the word of the Lord was an act of faith. This isn't some abstract theological system trying to shoehorn itself into the narrative. That was basically my point to begin with. I was comparing the actual story, Mary's submissiveness, to what I believe actually is a shoehorned system; the idea of Mary's permissiveness and the angel's proclamation being a request.

How you perceive my explanation of Mary's servant-obedience as 'soul rape' escapes me. :confused:
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
Good stuff, Wos.
Praying - coco
Sometimes memes can be helpful as well as humorous - Jocose
Yer mom is kindhearted and well respected in her community - JMG
And when I am sitting on my new saddle, I will know that my weight is resting upon the collective minds of CPS - GaryinVa

User avatar
Jocose
a large Chinese man named Wu
a large Chinese man named Wu
Posts: 21200
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Moonbase Alpha
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Jocose » Sat Apr 07, 2018 9:46 am

Why are protts so worried about giving honor to Mary?!
"And for Freds sake, DO NOT point anyone towards CPS or you'll put them off of both Christianity and pipe smoking forever." ~ FredS



Image

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 19393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Sat Apr 07, 2018 10:09 am

+JMJ+
John-Boy wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:49 pm
Good stuff, Wos.
:thumbsup:
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 13202
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Sat Apr 07, 2018 12:52 pm

wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:51 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
Since when are the use of the words ''submit' or 'submissive' an indication of violence being done? Mary herself said she was a servant of the Lord. Servants submit to their masters...more than that we are called by the apostles over and over to submit ourselves to God and to those in authority over us. Mary's submission to the word of the Lord was an act of faith. This isn't some abstract theological system trying to shoehorn itself into the narrative. That was basically my point to begin with. I was comparing the actual story, Mary's submissiveness, to what I believe actually is a shoehorned system; the idea of Mary's permissiveness and the angel's proclamation being a request.

How you perceive my explanation of Mary's servant-obedience as 'soul rape' escapes me. :confused:
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
Of course Mary had a free choice. Just like Jonah did. That's never been the real issue though. The real issue is whether or not God would have gone on with his plan and whether or not Mary's (hypothetical) "No" would have thwarted God's plan. I (among others) contend that her free choice of "no" would not have thwarted God's plan, just as it didn't with Jonah's rebellion, as it didn't with Sarah's unbelief, etc. The conclusion doesn't have to end with some weird concept of soul rape. It is not out of bounds to suppose that if Mary said "No" God could have chosen another woman.

But the reality is that Mary responded in faith and submitted herself to God's plan that the world would be saved by a baby she would bear. The end of the argument, or at least the ground we both can affirm in the end, is that God knows how to pick 'em. Would anyone think God would have chosen an unwilling servant for such a task as this?
Christmas is Yule, dummies! We're doing the same thing, just better!

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

User avatar
Joshoowah
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Hermeneutic of suspicion
Posts: 4816
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Nairobi, Kenya; formerly Wilmore, KY; Formerly Athens, AL
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Joshoowah » Sat Apr 07, 2018 1:12 pm

wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
+JMJ+
Jester wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:24 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:11 am
tuttle wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:30 am
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:13 am
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?
[…]

… The angel did not come with a request: "Will you allow the Holy Spirit to come upon you in order that you will conceive in your womb and bear a son?", But he came with a proclamation: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a son."

[…]
To me this sounds like the angel essentially saying, "Look, this is gonna happen one way or the other, so you might as well relax and try to enjoy it."

If so, then "the holy rape of the soul", indeed.
I would be a lot more cautious in my words if I were you. You are indeed calling the God of all creation a rapist.
So, I'm right?

Okay. Thanx for the confirmation.

I guess we're done here. Image

——————————————————————————————————
coco wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:27 am
Rather than dealing with the conception, the Protestants would do well to go back and have a closer look at what Wos said about the nature of faith.
But remember, it's, firstly, what Josh said (or seemed to say). What we really need is for him to come back and weigh-in.

As for now … Image
What is it exactly that you would like me to weigh in on? I'd be happy to elaborate, as I feel I am quite comfortable discussing these sorts of topics.
"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: 37688
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by Del » Sat Apr 07, 2018 2:47 pm

tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 12:52 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:51 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:23 pm
tuttle wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:29 pm
I never did parlay this into making the proclamation a narrative of violence. … I was merely putting forth the exact words of Scripture and letting them stand in comparison …
Was the word "submit" or "submissive" or whatnot in there, and I just missed it?
Since when are the use of the words ''submit' or 'submissive' an indication of violence being done? Mary herself said she was a servant of the Lord. Servants submit to their masters...more than that we are called by the apostles over and over to submit ourselves to God and to those in authority over us. Mary's submission to the word of the Lord was an act of faith. This isn't some abstract theological system trying to shoehorn itself into the narrative. That was basically my point to begin with. I was comparing the actual story, Mary's submissiveness, to what I believe actually is a shoehorned system; the idea of Mary's permissiveness and the angel's proclamation being a request.

How you perceive my explanation of Mary's servant-obedience as 'soul rape' escapes me. :confused:
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
Of course Mary had a free choice. Just like Jonah did. That's never been the real issue though. The real issue is whether or not God would have gone on with his plan and whether or not Mary's (hypothetical) "No" would have thwarted God's plan. I (among others) contend that her free choice of "no" would not have thwarted God's plan, just as it didn't with Jonah's rebellion, as it didn't with Sarah's unbelief, etc. The conclusion doesn't have to end with some weird concept of soul rape. It is not out of bounds to suppose that if Mary said "No" God could have chosen another woman.

But the reality is that Mary responded in faith and submitted herself to God's plan that the world would be saved by a baby she would bear. The end of the argument, or at least the ground we both can affirm in the end, is that God knows how to pick 'em. Would anyone think God would have chosen an unwilling servant for such a task as this?
Adam and Eve disrupted God's plan.

Moses disrupted God's plan.
(By hitting the rock twice, after God had told him to "call forth" the water by words alone. Moses "broke the type" -- Jesus sacrificed himself once, and since then we call forth the reality of the sacrifice by words. No dying twice -- just as Moses was not supposed to strike the rock twice. Moses was punished severely for that.)

Anyhow.... If Mary had not accepted her mission, we might not yet have a Savior. There is no guarantee that God would have carried out His plan without the full cooperation of the persons He chose. This new Church that Christ established is based upon our freely choosing to love, obey, and serve God.
"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
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 19393
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by wosbald » Sat Apr 07, 2018 2:54 pm

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 12:52 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
Of course Mary had a free choice. Just like Jonah did. That's never been the real issue though. The real issue is whether or not God would have gone on with his plan and whether or not Mary's (hypothetical) "No" would have thwarted God's plan. I (among others) contend that her free choice of "no" would not have thwarted God's plan, just as it didn't with Jonah's rebellion, as it didn't with Sarah's unbelief, etc. The conclusion doesn't have to end with some weird concept of soul rape. It is not out of bounds to suppose that if Mary said "No" God could have chosen another woman.

But the reality is that Mary responded in faith and submitted herself to God's plan that the world would be saved by a baby she would bear. The end of the argument, or at least the ground we both can affirm in the end, is that God knows how to pick 'em. Would anyone think God would have chosen an unwilling servant for such a task as this?
Well, that's remarkably conciliatory. :thumbsup:

So, what I'm hearing you say is that, even if — per Jester — we "didn't need Mary's 'yes'", we sure as hell needed someone's, regardless of how long and hard God had to look to find that "yes".

We still tracking?

——————————————————————————————————————————————
Joshoowah wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 1:12 pm
wosbald wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:39 am
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.
coco wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:27 am
Rather than dealing with the conception, the Protestants would do well to go back and have a closer look at what Wos said about the nature of faith.
But remember, it's, firstly, what Josh said (or seemed to say). What we really need is for him to come back and weigh-in.

As for now … Image
What is it exactly that you would like me to weigh in on? I'd be happy to elaborate, as I feel I am quite comfortable discussing these sorts of topics.
Though I can't strictly speak for them, some of your Protestant compatriots appear to have a problem with your seeming characterization of faith as being an action. A "being faithful".

However, I dunno if they want to make an issue of it. I sure don't.
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 13202
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Mary Alone

Post by tuttle » Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:01 pm

wosbald wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 2:54 pm
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 12:52 pm
wosbald wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:24 pm
Okay, let's reset the convo and not get hung up on words (because you may be understanding them in a different context than I).

Did Mary truly have a free choice? A real, live option to say Yes or No?

Cuz Jester seems to imply not, inasmuch as he said that "we didn't need Mary's 'yes'" and that she had no choice (or more accurately, that she was "given no choice", which may well connote a different nuance).

Secondly, I didn't say that the Angel gave a request. I specifically said that his message was "proclamative/declarative".

What I'm really looking to get at is a Both/And. Both the Angel's declarativity and Mary's permissivity.
Of course Mary had a free choice. Just like Jonah did. That's never been the real issue though. The real issue is whether or not God would have gone on with his plan and whether or not Mary's (hypothetical) "No" would have thwarted God's plan. I (among others) contend that her free choice of "no" would not have thwarted God's plan, just as it didn't with Jonah's rebellion, as it didn't with Sarah's unbelief, etc. The conclusion doesn't have to end with some weird concept of soul rape. It is not out of bounds to suppose that if Mary said "No" God could have chosen another woman.

But the reality is that Mary responded in faith and submitted herself to God's plan that the world would be saved by a baby she would bear. The end of the argument, or at least the ground we both can affirm in the end, is that God knows how to pick 'em. Would anyone think God would have chosen an unwilling servant for such a task as this?
Well, that's remarkably conciliatory. :thumbsup:

So, what I'm hearing you say is that, even if — per Jester — we "didn't need Mary's 'yes'", we sure as hell needed someone's, regardless of how long and hard God had to look to find that "yes".

We still tracking?
Hmmm...what if I threw a wrench into this by saying that Mary's 'yes' was ordained from the foundation of the world? She was prophesied about some 700 years before her birth. Of course we needed Mary's 'yes', just as Nineveh needed Jonah's preaching. God used both as instruments to bring his salvation to people. But by saying we needed her 'yes' I'm not also saying that God's plan of salvation would have gone awry had Mary reacted in unbelief. Bottom line, Mary's 'yes' was from faith, and that faith was granted to her by God.
Christmas is Yule, dummies! We're doing the same thing, just better!

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

Post Reply