The Immaculate Heart of Mary is a heresy

[LilyM]

Originally Posted by budgie2

I really believe the sunrays represent Christ as the light of the world and could be extended outside his body in a light of the world picture. Mary is not the light of the world and Mary's teaching does not feature in the Gospel. We are asked to imitate Mary's discipleship and her obedience to God and acceptance to have children in difficult circumstances. A celibate could imitate Mary's virginity and married women can imitate her chastity prior to marriage.

Shows how much theology you know - and how much you know about the Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart devotions. Mary IS the light of the world - we are ALL the light of the world - Our Blessed Lord said it in the Gospels, Matthew 5:14: ''Ye are the light of the world. A city built on a hill ...'

And to say Mary's heart cannot be depicted surrounded by rays of light is as nonsensical as to say that she and the other saints cannot be depicted with a halo of light around their heads - which they almost invariably are - as Jesus' head is also depicted surrounded by a halo of light.

[Bob Crowley]

Originally Posted by budgie2

I believe it is a heresy as it depicts Mary as both God and Woman, a divinity and goddess. Jesus said that he was the way to the Father and that we would know the Father through him. The Sacred Heart of Jesus shows both Christ's humanity and divinity and is a divinely revealed statue. Mary could be represented as only having a flame in the place of her Immaculate Heart and the Sacred Heart could be placed in Mary's womb. This would have a more pro-life message (not divinely revealed). This is not yet defined dogma but it will be. Flame represents the Holy Spirit as Mary was a holy woman although I believe the heart with sunrays should really represent God's love. Sunrays are also used around the monstrance to represent the light of Christ's soul, Jesus the light of the world.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/I...e/2708b1f5.jpg

When Mary appeared to Bernadette Soubirous at Lourdes in the 19th century (too lazy to look up the year), the way she specifically identified herself, almost at the end of the appearnces, was "I am the Immaculate Conception". This had only been a defined dogma for about three years at the time, and I doubt if a rather uneducated 14 year old poverty stricken girl in the backblocks of France had ever heard of it.

Her priest had though, and it shook him to the core.

I can't see the problem.

I might add what Bishop Fulton Sheen had to say about the term. You will notice the uncanny timing of Mary's appearance and self-description at Lourdes and the new philosophical publications at around the same time.

"The definition of the Immaculate Conception was made when the modern world was born. Within five years of that date, and within six months of the apparition of Lourdes where Mary said, "I am the Immaculate Conception", Charles Darwin wrote his "Origin of Species", Karl Marx completed his "Introduction to the Philosophy of Hegel" ('Religion is the opiate of the people') and John Stuart Mill published his "Essay on Liberty". At the moment the spirit of the world was drawing up a philosophy that would issue in two world wars in twenty-one years and the threat of a third, the Church came forward to challenge the falsity of the new philosophy......

If these philosophers were right and if man is naturally good and capable of deification through his own efforts, then it follows that everyone is immaculately conceived.....

The dogma of the Immaculate Conception wilted and killed the false optimism of the inevitable and necessary progress of man without God. Humbled in his Darwinian-Marxian-Millian pride, modern man saw his doctrine of progress evaporate. The interval between the Napoleonic and Franco-Prussian Wars was fifty-five years; the interval between the Franco-Prussian War and World War I was forty three years; the interval between World War I and World War II twenty one years. Fifty-five, forty-three, twenty-one, and a Korean War five years after World War II are hardly progress. Man finally saw that he was not naturally good. Once having boasted he came from the beast, he now found himself to be acting as a beast."

[1ke]

Originally Posted by budgie2

I know it is not current practice to depict her with the Sacred Heart inside her womb instead of in her chest,

You are a confused individual. Mary is not depicted with the Sacred Heart in her chest. Mary is depicted with her Immaculate Heart in her chest, pierced by a sword as prophesied in Scripture. Hence the name of the image: The Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Get your symbols right. You are tilting at windmills. You have made up a fiction in your mind. And, calling the Pope a heretic is a bad idea.

Originally Posted by budgie2

but symbols sometimes need to be changed and we don't have a symbol for God the Father.

Of course we do. Christian art has symbols for the Father.

[1ke]

Originally Posted by budgie2

I have been doing research for the Church and I am developing my own theology.

I think you need to talk to a priest. Catholics don't "develop their own theology." Catholics faithfully teach and adhere to authentic revelation as handed down by the Magesterium. Catholics who "develop their own theology" have a name: heretics.

[budgie2]

[quote=LilyM;5274231]Shows how much theology you know - and how much you know about the Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart devotions. Mary IS the light of the world - we are ALL the light of the world - Our Blessed Lord said it in the Gospels, Matthew 5:14: ''Ye are the light of the world. A city built on a hill ...'


Christ was talking to his disciples and would really see it as referring to the Church as the light of the world which is the body of Christ on Earth, or his disciples for showing the light of the Gospel to others. I don't know where in the Gospel Christ says he's the light of the world, excuse me. I've been inspired by a religious picture at Church showing Jesus with sunrays coming out of him although there are also sunrays around a monstrance.

http://www.theangelsgarden.com/Merch...strance-Lg.jpg

[LilyM]

[quote=budgie2;5274555]

Originally Posted by LilyM

Shows how much theology you know - and how much you know about the Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart devotions. Mary IS the light of the world - we are ALL the light of the world - Our Blessed Lord said it in the Gospels, Matthew 5:14: ''Ye are the light of the world. A city built on a hill ...'


Christ was talking to his disciples and would really see it as referring to the Church as the light of the world which is the body of Christ on Earth, or his disciples for showing the light of the Gospel to others. I don't know where in the Gospel Christ says he's the light of the world, excuse me. I've been inspired by a religious picture at Church showing Jesus with sunrays coming out of him although there are also sunrays around a monstrance.

http://www.theangelsgarden.com/Merch...strance-Lg.jpg

'Christ... would really see it...' - and you know this how, exactly?

Again, saying that we should not portray Mary's heart with rays of light coming out of it is as much utter bunk as saying that we shouldn't portray her head with rays of light (aka a halo or aureole) coming out of it - fact is she is most ALWAYS so portrayed (see my picture in my signature - halo of light around her head) with no problems whatsoever.

[AdriannaJean]

I don't see why rays of sunlight from Mary's heart have to symbolize divinity. Think back to highschool English class when you studied symbolism. A symbol can have many meanings to you, but the only one that is relevant to the book is the one the author meant it to have. It is the same in art. You can take a symbol any which way you like, but the only one that matters is the one the artist meant to depict. If you wanted to draw the Immaculate Heart Of Mary you could do so with or without sunbeams. What would matter is the meaning you gave it. In this case, it is not you who is the artist so the appropriate response is not "well this is what I think it means, so it is heretical" but "oh, well I would have done it differently, but what the artist meant it to symbolize was not heretical, so therefore the piece is not heretical."

[budgie2]

Christ also calls himself the light of the world in the Gospel of John 8:12
When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." Although Christ also calls his disciples the light of the world, perhaps because they have been set alight by the Gospel and show the light of Christ to others.

My main problem with the picture of the Immaculate Heart is that it is just a female version of the Sacred Heart under a different name. It shows the same fire and sunrays aswell as crown in some versions and Mary is sometimes dressed the same. Is Mary simply a female Christ? Or did Mary play a different role entirely? I believe the Sacred Heart represents Christ's soul. Christ was also divine and son of God, although Mary was not divine and therefore should not have her soul represented in the same way. Mary was blessed as the Son of God passed through her womb.

[1ke]

Originally Posted by budgie2

My main problem with the picture of the Immaculate Heart is that it is just a female version of the Sacred Heart under a different name.

Um, no it is not.

The Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary are two completely different theologically and represented differently artistically speaking.

Have you studied anything about the Sacred Heart of Jesus or the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

Originally Posted by budgie2

It shows the same fire and sunrays aswell as crown in some versions and Mary is sometimes dressed the same.

It is not a crown of thorns, it is a crown of roses. The Immaculate Heart also shows Mary's heart being pierced by a sword, as was prophesied in Scripture.

As to being dressed similiarly, this is a ridiculous argument. All biblical figures are pictured dressed in long robes and tunics, because-- surprise, that's what they all wore in biblical times.

Originally Posted by budgie2

Is Mary simply a female Christ?

No. Mary is not a female Christ, nor does the Church teach this, nor does the Immaculate Heart of Mary claim this.

Originally Posted by budgie2

Or did Mary play a different role entirely?

Uh, is this a rhetorical question.

Originally Posted by budgie2

I believe the Sacred Heart represents Christ's soul. Christ was also divine and son of God, although Mary was not divine and therefore should not have her soul represented in the same way. Mary was blessed as the Son of God passed through her womb.

What you believe is (a) wrong and (b) not relevant. What the Church teache is what is releveant.

The Sacred Heart image is not an image of Christ's soul, nor does the Immaculate Heart image depicting Mary as divine in any way.

How old are you? What sort of study have you done of church theology?

[Nick_in_MB]

Originally Posted by budgie2

My main problem with the picture of the Immaculate Heart is that it is just a female version of the Sacred Heart under a different name.

It's got a different name because it is different.

[Jennifer J]

http://www.ewtn.com/Devotionals/heart/heart1.htm

Any images of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Conception are the ARTIST'S interpretations of the devotion. They each use artistic symbols. Perhaps a study of ART would be helpful for you, as you are confusing artistic symbols with Church Teaching....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_symbolism



http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07168a.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07163a.htm

[LilyM]

Originally Posted by 1ke

Um, no it is not.

The Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary are two completely different theologically and represented differently artistically speaking.

Have you studied anything about the Sacred Heart of Jesus or the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

It is not a crown of thorns, it is a crown of roses. The Immaculate Heart also shows Mary's heart being pierced by a sword, as was prophesied in Scripture.

In the interests of complete accuracy, Our Lady of Fatima is represented with her Immaculate Heart surrounded by a crown of thorns, not roses. As in the depiction attached.

However, it must be pointed out that this is utterly unique among depictions of the Immaculate Heart - of which all others DO depict roses and not thorns.

[ALLGIRLS]

Originally Posted by srlucado

I don't know why, but I am continually amazed at people who read a little, hear a little, learn a little, and when they find something that seems inconsistent, or incomprehensible, or outright contradictory, they jump to the immediate conclusion that, "Hey, the Church is wrong!"

How about jumping to this conclusion instead: "Hey, I don't know what I'm talking about!"

For 2,000 years, the Church has held off a lot of heresies--real ones, like Arians, or Albigensians, or Hussites, or many others. Serious theological divides have been investigated, analyzed, discussed, and resolved.

Then some guy comes along with some partly formed idea and immediately concludes I'm right and that goofball in the Vatican with the big hat doesn't know what's going on.

Think about this: Pope Benedict has forgotten more about theology and the Catholic faith than you'll ever know. Just accept it, even if you haven't read anything he's written (and he's written a lot). He didn't get to be Pope by drawing a picture of a cute bunny.

Just take the Church's word for it; is that so hard? And if there's something you don't understand, can't you put it in a question form, like "Isn't it heretical to..." instead of trying to be the next Martin Luther?

Sorry to be such a grouch about this, but really.

[Palm Tree]

Originally Posted by budgie2

My mum has a picture of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a common religious representation. I have been doing some research on the nature of God and light and I really believe that the shining heart represents the love of the Father in the Son as Timothy says that God is light: "God the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in approachable light, whom no one has seen or can see." 1 Timothy 6:15-16
God (the Father) could be described as a shining presence of love, or shining essence of love as there is a certain light aspect to God. I believe the shining heart of Christ represents divine love and could be used on its own as a symbol of God the Father. Christ resembles Mary in the physical aspect of his body however, the Sacred Heart is an aspect of Christ which resembles the Father. Any comments.

If you really want to do some research on the Immaculate Heart of Mary, here are a couple links to get you started:

Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
(from the New Advent Catholic Encycolpedia)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07168a.htm

Immaculate Heart of Mary
(from Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Heart_of_Mary

[budgie2]

Originally Posted by Palm Tree

If you really want to do some research on the Immaculate Heart of Mary, here are a couple links to get you started:

Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
(from the New Advent Catholic Encycolpedia)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07168a.htm

Immaculate Heart of Mary
(from Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Heart_of_Mary

So the two miracles dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and Immaculate Conception are to St. Catherine Laboure and founder of the miraculous medal and Our Lady of Fatima. Is that right? I know that it's not defined doctrine but I have strong disbelief in the Immaculate Conception which also means that I have to see these miracles as false.

I dislike the Immaculate conception on a number of grounds. Here are two:
- Mary was saved from the point of her conception and not through the saving action of Christ.
- The Immaculate conception led to the doctrine of the Assumption which means that Mary is the only human being in history to never have died or resurrected, excluding her son who shared the same burden of death with us. Therefore Mary's heart is not immaculate and loving and it is also popular belief that she did not share the pains of childbirth.