Nun receives death threats for suggesting Mary was not a virgin

[Eugene]

Source: The Guardian

Nun receives death threats for suggesting Mary was not a virgin

Lucía Caram sparks anger in Spain after appearing to contradict
Catholic teaching on perpetual virginity of mother of Jesus

Sam Jones in Madrid
Thursday 2 February 2017 15.33 GMT

A nun in Spain who says she received death threats for suggesting that Mary probably had sex with her husband, Joseph, has apologised for any offence caused but accused her critics of deliberately misunderstanding her point.

Sister Lucía Caram, a well-known Dominican nun with more than 183,000 Twitter followers, appeared to contradict church teaching when she appeared on Spanish TV on Sunday to discuss sex and faith.

“I think Mary was in love with Joseph and that they were a normal couple – and having sex is a normal thing,” she told the Chester in Love show, adding: “It’s hard to believe and hard to take in. We’ve ended up with the rules we’ve invented without getting to the true message.”

Caram, who was born in Argentina but lives in a Catalan convent, said sexuality was a God-given, basic part of every individual and a means of self-expression. However, she said it was something the church had long struggled with.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/02/nun-receives-death-threats-suggesting-mary-virgin

[Sanity Claws]

1. Only Catholics believe that Mary remained a virgin

Christian theology says Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. My understanding is that only Catholics hold the belief that she remained a virgin after that.

[rug]

4. The Orthodox do as well.

[Doreen]

2. Wow, humans in general have this hang up with sex.

She sounds like a very intelligent person to me.

[Doodley]

3. They think they are defending the faith by threatening to kill - makes sense!

[rug]

5. She's protected.

[irisblue]

9. Sister Albertine could hit Anyone with an eraser at 60 feet.

She was scary

[braddy]

6. The Guardian seems to have chosen to describe it as Mary not being a virgin, rather than Mary

not 'remaining' a virgin after marriage to her Joseph. Protestant Christians also believe that Mary had a normal marriage to Joseph after the birth of Christ, and even more children.

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. The subtitle talks about "perpetual virginity", and calls him 'husband', not 'fiance'

or any similar term. So I think it's very clear it's about whether she ever had sex with her husband.

[rickford66]

7. Jesus had brothers.

Where would they have come from? Note: I am agnostic. I will stay out of the rest of this post.

[rug]

10. Here:

http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm

[ymetca]

8. Visions of the BVM at Lourdes...

Poor teen girl says the BVM (Blessed Virgin Mary) told her "I am the Immaculate Conception". That mystical revelation, along with others by sexually repressed, pubescent females, eventually resulted in the Catholic Church (Vatican II) foisting the ingeniously ludicrous claim that Mary was taken bodily, physically, into Heaven. A neat way to add a fourth female deity-like being to their Holy Trinity of phallicism, thus keeping millions of women in the fold.

Also, unlike even Jesus, she becomes the first person in all of human history never to die.

This nun doesn't even know her own catechism. Better to have suggested the entire story is mythology and just be done with it.

[rug]

12. You're muddling the doctrine of the Assumption with the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

The latter, although taught for centuries, was announced as dogma in 1854, years before Vatican I (not II). The Assumption, or Dormition, also taught for centuries was announced as dogma in 1950.

Nor is there a "fourth female deity-like being".

You shouldn't swagger unless you know what you're talking about.

[ymetca]

14. I sit humiliated

Thank you for the correction. Now tell me how the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception are related, please.

[rug]

19. Simply, if Mary was born without sin, she was born without death.

Humans were created immortal in Paradise. With the original sin, both were lost.

With Mary, there was no need to wait for the final resurrection and she was "assumed" into heaven, body and soul, which is the expectation of all Christians at the final resurrection and the gift to all who choose to live a good life.

[ymetca]

27. But wasn't that dogma

a result of the visions at Lourdes & Fatima? And not officially announced until Vatican II?

That was the idea of the BVM stating her identity AS the Immaculate Conception, not the progenitor OF it. A significant transition point, which elevated her status, and created a quaternity of sorts (vaguely) with the Holy Trinity. Something which the Church is still wrestling with (no female priests). Sort of an acknowledgment of the Hebrew Daath.

I must say I am somewhat embarrassed by my flippancy on the subject. However, I still suspect the Church hierarchy was being strategic in terms of acknowledging a more significant role for the BVM, especially as a means of blunting the rise of modern feminism. It "allowed" women to pray to a feminine "deity", instead of just a masculine one, while keeping in place a male-dominated system.

Remember, the original sin was not sex itself, but knowledge. "Who told you you were naked?" The Gnostics saw this knowledge as the way out of a false paradise. The psychological inevitability of Innocence Lost, perhaps. Dante's Beatrice. Goethe's Eternal Feminine, leading to perfection.

The epistemological conundrum was settled long ago with the concept of Yin and Yang, or fundamental duality. But several thousand years of monotheistic phallicism was evidently required for our further "penetration" into the mysteries of Maya. The birth of Christ, perhaps, represents our lowest point in the arc of spirit into matter, in Hindu parlance, and the rebirth of cosmic consciousness, or the Noosphere. The knowledge and functioning of Indra's Net.

The BVM represents a significant phase transition toward a "higher" understanding of the nature of reality, in furtherance of our quest as a species to take more control over so-called "blind evolution". She is most definitely a Holy Grail symbol. It's this lack of feminine understanding that leads so many people to be fearful of birth control and reproductive science, as they see it as meddling with one of the most "primal forces of nature". The Island of Doctor Moreau vs. the X-Men.

I guess my point (and perhaps the source of my initial flippancy) is that this nun saying Mary had a "normal" (yikes! even sexual!) life after Jesus, is like saying Jesus got drunk on occasion, or played hopscotch as a kid. It's this sort of confused Biblical literalism that is an impediment. It is ignorance. Much like the so-called "constitutional originalism" that befuddles the unwary. The letter of the law is not the spirit of the law. She misses all that is mystical, numinous, and as yet unknown that has guided so many towards a better life, and a better world for us all.

When MLK said "I might not make it to the mountain top", he wasn't referring to a literal mountain. Jesus spoke in parables. And God said "I AM." But that's just the dead letters. They mean nothing without the spirit.

[rug]

29. It's been part of Tradition going way back.

Here's the official history and definition:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

There may have been a strategic or political reason for declaring it dogma in 1854 (e.g., the doctrine of papal infallibility in 1870 was announced as Rome was surrounded at the end of the Risorgimento) but it has ancient roots.

Personally, I find much of Mariology to be unnecessary and overreaching.

If you really want to flip out, look up "Co-Redemptorix". A lot of conservative Catholics have been pushing this, with no success to date.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-Redemptrix

[ymetca]

33. Yeah, I also like the alternative script

where Jesus instructs Judas to betray him, and Judas making the ultimate sacrifice of knowing that for all eternity he will be reviled for secretly doing "God's work".

Kinda like those Wall Street guys claiming they are also doing "God's work". Oh sure. Why not?

Everything is true. Nothing is forbidden.

[rug]

37. There is a Gnostic Gospel of Judas that is sympathetic to him.

The only known copy is in Coptic.

Interestingly, the Coptic Orthodox Church considers Pontius Pilate and his wife to be saints.

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church recognized Pilate as a saint in the 6th century, based on the account in the Acts of Pilate, as it does his wife, Claudia Procula, whose strange dream of Christ induced her to try to stop his crucifixion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate

[ymetca]

38. There's something about chosen suffering

hidden beneath all of this, of course. And perhaps more than a hint of sado-masochism. Some say that the greatest advances in human history have come from times of greatest suffering. Is it not fitting that we say "necessity is the mother of invention"?

A Faustian bargain, I suppose, this path we chose.

I have always loved Dan Fogelberg's lyric:

As we hang beneath the heavens
And hover over hell
Our hearts become the instruments
We learn to play so well

[rug]

42. Great song.

[Bretton Garcia]

22. But "The Mother of God" she is often called.

She's not in the Trinity. But it sometimes looks like there's a loophole being left open here.

At least enough for a denied syncretism with female, mother religions, goddesses.

[ymetca]

30. Sort of like "The One That Got Away"

An apocryphal fish tale...

[Bretton Garcia]

50. Probably used by the Church to co-opt pagan godesses

Later suppressed. But still there, even today.

Interestingly, if Mary is the "Mother of God," then she comes before God, chronologically and possibly in every way.

So the conscious conversion of Christianity to a form of goddess worship, is always just a few steps away.

Which would increase the status of nuns and mothers and women, I guess.

Even today, many Catholic fathers change their own name to "Mary."

[rug]

52. It simply she means she was the mother of Jesus, who is God the Son.

The title Theotokos

1. Adoption at the Third Ecumenical Council

As a title for the Virgin Mary, Theotokos was recognized by the Orthodox Church at Third Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus in 431. It had already been in use for some time in the devotional and liturgical life of the Church. The theological significance of the title is to emphasize that Mary's son, Jesus, is fully God, as well as fully human, and that Jesus' two natures (divine and human) were united in a single Person of the Trinity. The competing view at that council was that Mary should be called Christotokos instead, meaning "Birth-giver to Christ." This was the view advocated by Nestorius, then Patriarch of Constantinople. The intent behind calling her Christotokos was to restrict her role to be only the mother of "Christ's humanity" and not his divine nature.

Nestorius' view was anathematized by the Council as heresy, (see Nestorianism), since it was considered to be dividing Jesus into two distinct persons, one who was Son of Mary, and another, the divine nature, who was not. It was defined that although Jesus has two natures, human and divine, these are eternally united in one personhood. Because Mary is the mother of God the Son, she is therefore duly entitled Theotokos.

Calling Mary the Theotokos or the Mother of God (Μητηρ Θεου was never meant to suggest that Mary was coeternal with God, or that she existed before Jesus Christ or God existed. The Church acknowledges the mystery in the words of this ancient hymn: "He whom the entire universe could not contain was contained within your womb, O Theotokos."

The title "Theotokos" continues to be used frequently in the hymns of the Orthodox Church.

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Theotokos

I think you need to google "hypostatic union".

[Bretton Garcia]

55. The Church, Nestor, propounded this. But?

Last edited Sat Feb 4, 2017, 04:33 PM - Edit history (1)

I'd note that many reject the church and the hypostatic union, as sophistry.

The term "Theotokos" or God bearer, was in use by say, 250 AD. Attempts were made to qualify it, rein in its meaning. But I'd argue those attempts fail to really entirely deface the resonances of this popular term; which undoubtedly interfaced usefully with the goddess-centered tribes the Church wanted to attract.

Later the Church denied that it ever did that, as it would be heretical syncretism. But we know that many angels and saints were pagan gods, being allowed a secondary place in the Church. This allowed pagan tribes to continue to partly worship their earlier gods. Though they would be encouraged to soon shift their attention to the Trinity.

[rug]

56. No, that's backwards.

Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, explained Jesus Christ with dyophysitism, holding that the two natures of Jesus, human and divine, were separate and distinct.



He argued against the title of Theotokos on the ground that Mary cold only be the mother of Jesus, the human Christ, not Jesus the second person of the Trinity.

That view was rejected at the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, which instead held that Jesus had two natures in one person in a hypostatic union.

The term Theotokos emphasized that Nestorious' Christokos definition, was wrong.

Now, anyone can reject all this but anyone who rejects it asserting sophistry likely either does not know it or does not understand it. You really have to know something in order to reject it, let alone condemn it.

Your third paragraph is itself the result of a malformed syncretism.

[Bretton Garcia]

59. Yes, Nestorius was rejected by hypostaticists

But they both tried to deal with the same problem ... and neither could convincingly do it. Neither N. nor his opponents - or any logical construction - could really deal with, explain, a divine God born from an ordinary woman. Or an immortal God who dies.

To fix parts of this, many apologetics sophistries were tried. One was the hydrostatic sophistry. Another, to give Mary divine, godly status. As in some forms of Marion worship. And in a vexed way, the concept of Mary as a Theotokos.

Her divinity here, was only hinted at though. And was eventually rejected. Still the old term "Mother of God" hung on. Even as its implications were officially denied, defaced.

[Angry Dragon]

11. I have heard that the church also promotes that Mary's mother was also a virgin

superstition abounds in the minds of the faithful

[rug]

13. That's incorrect.

Both statements.

[Angry Dragon]

15. NO............I did hear that on a Catholic Forum

and as far as the second one I will wait for you to prove to the world that a belief in a god is not superstition

[rug]

18. Well . . . . if Mary's mother was a virgin, there'd be no Mary.

No one claims Mary is a goddess.

You probably got that notion from a site like this:

http://catholicplanet.com/virgin/index.htm

As to your second point, it's your claim that theism is superstition.

[Angry Dragon]

62. If Mary was a virgin then no Jesus

I never said Mary was a goddess
Never have visited catholicplanet
I thought all beliefs were valid?

[rug]

63. Incorrect.

It is proclaimed that Jesus is God, unlike Mary.

Before you can determine if a belief is valid, you have to understand it.

[Angry Dragon]

64. Is it not taught that god impregnated Mary??

Not all christians believe that Jesus is a god
How many religious people truly understand their god??

[rug]

65. Not impregnated in the conventional sense.

The phrase for the Incarnation is "The Word became flesh". God didn't stick his dick in Mary if that's your meaning.

It is true that not all Christians believe Jesus is God (not a god) but that is the belief held by most from the first century.

No one, religious or irreligious, understands God. The best anyone can do is understand each religions's teaching of God, no matter how limited it is.

But everyone should check their bigotry before talking about it.

[Angry Dragon]

66. It seems you have drawn a circle

You tell me that one has to understand a belief before it is valid
There is a belief in a god in your responses
Then you tell me that no one understands god
So I ask you how can one believe in a god if they have limited knowledge of their god

It seems I am free to believe anything I want because I do not have to have knowledge to back up my beliefs
It seems that a belief is just having a feeling and not based on any facts

[rug]

67. Do you understand the difference between a thing and the description of a thing?

For purposes of religious discussion, understanding the description and teaching of a god(s) is essential. It is also necessary to understand that most religions teach that God can not be fully understood. Nevertheless the teaching can.

Do you know anyone, religious or irreligious, who understands God?

[Angry Dragon]

68. To answer your last question:

How can one understand something that does not exist??

Just to add a little humor
God works in mysterious ways
It is impossible to understand god

So if it is impossible to understand god, how do you know it is impossible??
Perhaps people do understand god and find it mean of their god to let their child die

To you it is a mystery that your god would allow this to happen because your faith in your god dose not allow you to question this because your god has to have a reason for this to happen.
What if in reality your god does not really care
Does not have the power to do the things you think he/she does

No proof that a god or gods exist

Better to believe in the Universe....... that does exist ... we do not know everything about but we still explore it and seek answers
Unlike religion where there does not to be much exploration except for a very few
Perhaps by exploring the Universe we may someday find the god that you believe in ..... and that would be okay because then we may truly understand this god

[rug]

69. You can understand why it does not or can not exist.

To answer your second question, do you think it is possible to understand the universe?

This

To you it is a mystery that your god would allow this to happen because your faith in your god dose not allow you to question this because your god has to have a reason for this to happen.

is an example of bias supplanting knowledge.

The last two paragraphs are a passable sermonette.

[Angry Dragon]

70. A long time ago there were people that wanted me to be a pastor

Yes I do believe in the future we will understand the Universe
By that time you and I will be dust in the wind


I do not have a bias ........... I just do not believe as you do .......... feel free to put some facts in front of me so I can believe

[rug]

71. "The fact of uncertainty, the uncertainty of facts and the cultural resonance of doubt"

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/373/2055/20140455.full

The fact of the matter is the full article is behind a paywall.

It's curious, is it not, that your doubt is built on unassailable certainty and my faith is based on unassailable doubt.

[Angry Dragon]

72. Seems like there is enough doubt for everyone

[snooper2]

73. The real god of the Universe is this

Hubble Space Telescope photograph of the 4,400 light-year long relativistic jet of Messier 87, which is matter being ejected by the 6.4×109 M☉ supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy


The nearby Andromeda Galaxy, 2.5 million light-years away, contains a (1.1–2.3) × 108 (110-230 million) M☉ central black hole, significantly larger than the Milky Way's.[31] The largest supermassive black hole in the Milky Way's vicinity appears to be that of M87, weighing in at (6.4 ± 0.5) × 109 (~6.4 billion) M☉ at a distance of 53.5 million light-years.[32][33] On 5 December 2011 astronomers discovered the largest supermassive black hole in the nearby universe yet found, that of the supergiant elliptical galaxy NGC 4889, weighing in at 2.1×1010 (21 billion) M☉ at a distance of 336 million light-years away in the Coma Berenices constellation.[34] Black holes in quasars are much larger, due to their active state of continuous growing phase. The hyperluminous quasar APM 08279+5255 has a supermassive black hole with a mass of 2.3×1010 (23 billion) M☉. Larger still is at another hyperluminous quasar S5 0014+81, the largest supermassive black hole yet found, which weighs in at 4.0×1010 (40 billion) M☉, or 10,000 times the size of the black hole at the Milky Way Galactic Center. Both quasars are 12.1 billion light years away.



Like to see Jesus float through that, or his dad

[hrmjustin]

20. That is not a part of Catholic doctrine.

[guillaumeb]

16. Words matter. And the meaning of words also matters.

The word almah (used in Isaiah) is rare—usually translated as “maiden” it appears only ten times in the Hebrew Scriptures, six of these in the plural and four in the singular.
In the few verses where almah appears, the word clearly denotes a young woman who is not married but is of marriageable age. Although almah does not implicitly denote virginity, it is never used in the Scriptures to describe a “young, presently married woman.” It is important to remember that in the Bible, a young Jewish woman of marriageable age was presumed to be chaste.
The prophet could have chosen a different word had he wanted to describe Immanuel’s mother as a virgin. Betulah is a more common way to refer to a woman who has never been with a man (both in biblical and modern Hebrew).

https://jewsforjesus.org/issues-v09-n01/almah-virgin-or-young-maiden

So if the Prophet Isaiah was referring to the mother of the Messiah as a maiden, that could refer to her status pre-marriage.

And in the Gospels, the earliest Gospel is that of Mark, which has no claim of virgin birth.

Over 2 thousand years, there have been a number of stories that contradict each other in details, yet the essential message, the message of Jesus, remains.

[Bretton Garcia]

23. A thousand contradictory details suggest the main message is bad, too.

[guillaumeb]

34. An interesting, if unsupported, assertion on your part.

Details on the narrative, the various accounts, can vary as distance from the action increases. And variance can be introduced as an account is passed down orally, and again as the account is translated from one language to another.

But your assertion rests on your personal analysis of what comprises the "main message", and as such is unique to you.

[Bretton Garcia]

43. Since you first mentioned the essential message...

What do you think it is?

[guillaumeb]

44. Well, you actually talked of "the main message".

I think each person must find that message.

[hrmjustin]

17. I don't believe she remained a virgin. I have no issue with people believing she did.

I do believe in the Dormition of Mary.

[trotsky]

21. Religion: the reason why the reaction to this is anything other than...

"Meh, so what?"

[Bretton Garcia]

24. So Joseph was not cuckolded by God?

But God "came over her."

And then she has a mostly normal pregnancy.

Something's off here.

[rug]

31. Messiah Interruptus.

[Fix The Stupid]

25. Comedy gold...I mean...really?

Look at the language and the words being used in this thread...made up bullshit terminology and definitions and people are just eating it up....defending it, trying to define it for us...simply hilarious.

I love how they capitalize certain words too... "this word here is so fucking serious,, so fucking divine, I need to capitalize it..."

What year is it again? 2017 or 517?

Are people really debating whether an imaginary woman from 2000 years ago got fucked or not???

[rug]

32. You seem incensed at the notion of a god.

Why does something you consider nonexistent bother you?

[guillaumeb]

35. Physician, heal thyself. eom

[ymetca]

39. You

are the Master who makes the grass green...

There. I capitalized "You" and "Master".

Or, in more modern parlance, "You da Man!"

But I agree with you. Like Timothy Leary asking, "Who owns the Jesus property?" A most pertinent question!

[trotsky]

40. "Are people really debating whether an imaginary woman from 2000 years ago got fucked or not???"

Why yes, yes they are. And also whether or not she ever had sex again.

This shit's IMPORTANT, I tell ya.

[hrmjustin]

41. Trash thread is an option if you don't like or can't handle the debate.

[Iggo]

45. Why trash comedy gold?

Next, let's argue about whether or not Gandalf is gay.

Same shit and just as hilarious.

[hrmjustin]

49. Enjoy!

[SamKnause]

26. It is 2017 !!!!!!!!!!!!

I am so sick and tired of this mythical bullshit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ymetca]

28. mythical, yes

but "mystical"? I think not!

Eat some 'shrooms and call me in the morning...

[guillaumeb]

36. And yet you clicked on it, and read it, and felt compelled to respond.

Do you enjoy tormenting yourself?

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. Would you never read or reply to a thread about death threats about myths?

If, for instance, someone got a death threat for saying "Rama's Bridge was not built by Rama, but is natural", would you find it strange that a DUer replied to the thread with "I am so sick and tired of this mythical bullshit"? I think it's a normal reaction to reply to bullshit and threats of violence by calling it out as such.

[guillaumeb]

48. Rama's bridge was NOT built by Rama?

That certainly changes things.

Yes, I do understand. I am tired of reading and hearing GOP politicians speak supply side nonsense. And occasionally I write letters to the Editor about it.

[still_one]

51. Death threats? Let me guess, they were made by devout Catholics

[rug]

53. Show me.

https://twitter.com/sorluciacaram?lang=en

[still_one]

54. rug you may have misinterpreted my post. What I was saying is I wouldn't be surprised if it was

someone who professed to be a devout Catholic, not someone who was actually a devout Catholic

[rug]

57. I probably did.

I doubt even the most hardcore traditionalists have gone that far. Yet.

[still_one]

58. I agree

[Iggo]

60. That's a really, really good guess.

[still_one]

61. Those that are involved in that kind of hatred think they are devout Catholics, but really aren't