Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
it says that blood drawn from her viens ransomed the world.Originally posted by Rakka Rage:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Where in that quote was "ransomed by her blood" stated? Oh, it wasn't. That was thrown in there by Rakka Rage, and you endorse it as truth.
Galations 4:4-5Originally posted by hrhema:
Catholics will never convince non-catholics that Mary is the mediatrix. There is absolutely no scripture for this. This is a man made doctrine.
Who said that Mary died for our sins? Heck, it's debatable in the Church, because it has not been defined, whether or not Mary was alive or dead when she was assumed. We do not know. Certainly, then, no educated Catholic calls her a "martyr" in the sense you speak of. However, "martyr" literally means "witness," and witness she certainly did.Originally posted by hrhema:
Mary was not a martyr as some try to say.
No, but her willing participation with God's will brought about our Redeemer.Originally posted by hrhema:
Mary did not shed her blood for the redemption of man.
So, in a nutshell, you deny the Incarnation, in which God humbled Himself to be born of a woman, of human flesh, so that He could succeed where we failed? I think you're alone on this, my friend. Jesus is God, but he received His human nature from Mary.Originally posted by hrhema:
The blood in a child does not come from the mother but the Father and in Jesus' case his Father was and is God. His blood came from God. This blood was shed on the cross. This God blood.
I could pull a hundred thousand of these analogies...and it wouldn't change anything.Originally posted by hrhema:
Why don't catholics go back and study history and realize that after the flood there was a very wicked woman named Semiramsis that was married to Nimrod. When Nimrod died she married her own son Tammuz. She proclaimed Tammuz a God. Noah's son killed Tammuz for this abomination. Thereafter she proclaimed that Tammuz was virgin born and she was the Madonna and thus became the worship of Madonna and Child. The only difference is she claimed to be a Goddess.
Good for them. They have a semblance of the Truth, but instead it has become perverted, or was an imperfect forshadowing of the Truth of Jesus Christ. There are a lot of similarities with Christianity and religions that proceeded it. That doesn't negate the validity of our religion.Originally posted by hrhema:
Every ancient religion has had a madonna and child. The difference is that these madonna's are all divine or a deity.
The mediatrix between him and his son, eh? Perhaps God also did not intend for you to speak about things that have nothing to do with Catholic doctrine. Throwing out key words like "mediatrix" with context that is not Catholic theology just shows that you're attacking for the sake of attacking; you have no real valid argument.Originally posted by hrhema:
When God chose a virgin woman to be the vessel of honor to carry his son he never intended for people to start worshipping her nor did he intend for people to say she is the mediatrix between him and his son.
Right, we Catholics just ignore these things. Oh, or perhaps, we have perfectly legitimate explanations for these verses that you use hastily to dishonor Christ's mother, whom He no doubt loved and honored more than anyone has ever loved his or her mother. After all, Jesus kept the law perfectly. I doubt he would have ignored the commandment to "honor thy father and they mother."Originally posted by hrhema:
When Catholics can show by scripture that Mary was anything more than a vessel of honor to carry the Son of God then others will believe. We know for a fact that Jesus rebuked her more than once and even said those who believe is his mother, brothers and sisters.
Plainly because you ignore the historical context of the language.Originally posted by hrhema:
The Bible plainly states that Jesus had brothers and sisters through Mary.
Something you know nothing about, considering you think we teach that Mary is the "mediatrix between the father and the son."Originally posted by hrhema:
This flies in the face of Catholic Tradition.
So, then, there are people today who are biologically linked to Jesus Christ? Surely you think they would have held on to this. Who wouldn't want to be genetically linked to the Savior of the world? And yet, no group claims this. Or perhaps Jesus foresaw people who would make this claim, which is why he taught the lack of importance of biological relationship to Him in favor of spiritual relationship with Him.Originally posted by hrhema:
Mary did have sexual relations with Joseph and had other children besides Jesus.
THE LEGIONARY AND THE HOLY TRINITYTo the Second Divine Person Mary's relation is the one nearest to our comprehension, that of Mother. But her motherhood is of a closeness, a permanency, and a quality infinitely surpassing the normal human relationship. In the case of Jesus and Mary the union of souls was primary, and of flesh secondary; so that even when separation of flesh occurred at birth, their union was not interrupted but went on into further incomprehensible degrees of intensity and association - such that Mary can be declared by the Church to be not only the "helpmate" of that Second Divine Person - Co-Redemptress in salvation: Mediatress in grace - but actually "like unto Him."
Again, emphasis added:Our Blessed Lord did not begin his work of redemption without the consent of Mary, solemnly asked and freely given. Likewise he did not complete it on Calvary without her presence and her consent.
THE LEGIONARY AND THE EUCHARISTThey will understand the essential part of Mary, the new Eve, in those holy mysteries-such a part that "when her beloved Son was consummating the redemption of mankind on the altar of the cross, she stood at his side, suffering and redeeming with him." (Pope Pius XI) And when they come away, Mary will be with her legionaries, giving them a share and part in her administration of graces, so that on each and all of those they meet and work for are lavished the infinite treasures of redemption.
THE LEGIONARY AND THE MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRISTThat moment of our death is represented by a cross, all dripping with blood, upon which our head has just finished his work. At the foot of the cross stands a figure, so desolate that it seems impossible for her to continue to live. That woman is the mother alike of the Redeemer and of the redeemed. It was first from her veins that the blood was drawn which now lies scattered cheaply about, but which has ransomed the world. That Precious Blood will henceforth flow through the Mystical Body, forcing life, so to speak, into every crevice of it. But all the consequences of this flowing must be understood, so that they can be applied. That precious stream brings to the soul the likeness of Christ; but it is the Christ complete: not merely the Christ of Bethlehem and Thabor - the Christ of joy and glory, but as well the Christ of pain and sacrifice - the Christ of Calvary.
Every Christian should be made to realise that he cannot pick and choose in Christ. Mary realised this fully even in the joyful Annunciation. She knew that she was not invited to become only a Mother of Joys, but the Woman of Sorrows as well. But she had always given herself utterly to God, and now she received him completely. With full knowledge, she welcomed that infant life with all it stood for. She was no less willing to endure anguish with him than she was to taste bliss with him. In that moment, those Sacred Hearts entered into a union so close as to approach identity. Henceforth, they will beat together in and for the Mystical Body. Thereby Mary has become the Mediatrix of all Graces, the Spiritual Vessel which receives and gives our Lord's Most Precious Blood. As it was with Mary, so shall it be with all her children. The degree of man's utility to God will always be the closeness of his union with the Sacred Heart, whence he can draw deeply of the Precious Blood to bestow it on other souls. But that union with the heart and blood of Christ is not to be found in a phase of his life, but in the life entire. It is as futile, as it is unworthy, to welcome the King of Glory and to repulse the Man of Sorrows, for the two are but the one Christ. He who will not walk with the Man of Sorrows has no part in his mission to souls, nor share in its sequel of glory.
You are correct that God did not need to be born of a woman to achieve His purpose. He is God, after all.Originally posted by Rakka Rage:
it says that blood drawn from her viens ransomed the world.
i did not ask you to repeat your argument that Mary gave Jesus His humanity and His blood.
she did not. Jesus gave Mary her blood and humanity.
the blood that ransomed the world was not drawn from Marys veins.
No problem, I await with interest your answers.Originally posted by GraceSaves:
Tragic,
Thank you for taking the time to look this up!
I'm going to do some studying on this so that I give an accurate response. But, do please note, that the quote first provided has been seperated greatly by a good chunk of context. We were lead to assume that there was no break, that these statements immediately preceeded one another. They do not. There is context IN BETWEEN. There almost always is when Marian quotes are used. I don't know if it's meant to deceive or not, because I am not the one who compiled them in such a way. However, it is inaccruate to just take it at face value and try to explain it.
Now that that's off my chest, I'll read through this carefully and have (hopefully) a nice in-depth answer by tonight.
Thanks again for doing the dirty work.
God bless,
Grant
The contention seems to have been that the RC church says so.Originally posted by HomeBound:
Please help me understand. Are you all saying that Mary's blood is part of salvation?
No, and DEFINITELY no in the context you are putting it in. Mary gave birth to the savior of the world, Jesus Christ. Jesus was both fully human and fully man, and as ONE He is the Redeemer. Mary provided Jesus with his human nature, which is inseperable now from his divine nature. More than any other human, she contributed to the redemption of mankind. SHE DID NOT REDEEM MANKIND. What she did was directly comply with the will of God to allow it to take place. This was the method God chose to redeem His people, and Mary said "yes" to it. She greatly assisted in the divine plan be bringing forth the Redeemer from her own human flesh, by means of the Holy Spirit. Co-redemptrix does not mean she did something equal to Christ. It means she worked with Christ, who is God, in achieving salvation for the whole human race.Originally posted by HomeBound:
Please help me understand. Are you all saying that Mary's blood is part of salvation?
the words you post do not explain why you think blood drawn from marys veins ransomed the world. Marys blood was not drawn when she bore Jesus.You are correct that God did not need to be born of a woman to achieve His purpose. He is God, after all.
What you neglect is that he DID choose it this way, so that He could humble Himself and do what we could not do, as humans ourselves. He was born of a woman. He received h is human nature from a human. Yes, He is the Creator of all, including humanity itself. But his actual flesh and blood came from the physcial process of gestation and birth of a human being, Mary.
the words you post do not explain why you think blood drawn from marys veins ransomed the world. Marys blood was not drawn when she bore Jesus. </font>[/QUOTE]Rakka, you are again correct. But do you know why? Because neither I nor the author of the quote from Legion of Mary said that Mary's blood ransomed the world. YOU are the one who titled the thread "Mary's blood ransomed the world!?" It is your own creation. So this line of reasoning is meaningless. You created it, I did not, nor did the quote. Nor do I or other Catholics believe or state that her blood ransomed us. She gave Jesus His blood, but Jesus was the one Whose blood was shed. Jesus is the Redeemer. His blood ransomed the world. Not Mary. As a Catholic, I say that without in anyway compromising my Catholic faith because that IS the Catholic faith.Originally posted by Rakka Rage:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />You are correct that God did not need to be born of a woman to achieve His purpose. He is God, after all.
What you neglect is that he DID choose it this way, so that He could humble Himself and do what we could not do, as humans ourselves. He was born of a woman. He received h is human nature from a human. Yes, He is the Creator of all, including humanity itself. But his actual flesh and blood came from the physcial process of gestation and birth of a human being, Mary.
blood drawn from Mary's veins is Mary's blood...Because neither I nor the author of the quote from Legion of Mary said that Mary's blood ransomed the world.
Do you deny that Jesus was borne of Mary?Originally posted by Rakka Rage:
if blood drawn from Mary's veins ransomed the world, then Mary's blood ransomed the world.
blood drawn from Mary's veins is Mary's blood...Originally posted by Rakka Rage:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Because neither I nor the author of the quote from Legion of Mary said that Mary's blood ransomed the world.
if you don't like it, get out.Rage, this entire thread has been a deceit on your part from the very beginning.
the title is not misleading.The misleading title.
???The edited and manipulated quotes.
i think it is you that does not understand. but thanks for nothing.Now this pretense of not understanding the actual meaning of the words without editing and in context.
you are disgraceful. get lost if you are not going to contribute to the discusion.It is disgraceful.
You are correct, Brian. They are from a handbook printed by the Legion of Mary, a lay Catholic Association.Originally posted by Briguy:
The quotes that have been used on this thread are not even "official" church teaching right? Aren't they just one persons thoughts on the issue.
Catholics have greater and lesser devotion to Mary. The handbook in question is written by Catholics who have a great devotion to Mary. They have obviously given greater thought to these matters than I have.I may be going out on a limb but if you three were writing a paper on Mary's position in the "church" it probably would be written differently then the author of the quotes we have been discussing, right?]