Our Lady is Omnipotent?


#1

I would like to ask everyone here a question. In another thread it quoted from the book “The Glories of Mary” and in it, it said that Our Lady is Omnipotent. Isn’t Omnipotent another word for Divine?


#2

our lady omnipotent or divine.

Mary said do what ever he says. Can you imagine what it was to hold the son of God in your womb??

Yes she was divine. How many of us could or even would watch our son die on a cross for all??


#3

Omnipotence (meaning being all-powerful) is an attribute of the divine, but it does not mean “divine” in itself.

The writers who say that Mary is omnipotent are engaging in a bit of hyperbole concerning the influence that she has with her Son.

Betsy


#4

Betsy,

What does this word Hyperbole mean?? I must oppologise I do not know what this word means.:blush:


#5

It’s an exaggeration. It’s like Jesus saying, if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. He was making a point, and doing it with hyperbole, (which was a rather common practice of Jewish rabbis, as it is of many devotional writers.)


#6

Thanks, Jim.


#7

Our Lady is omnipotent because of her intercession with her Son, Who is All-Powerful.


#8

No she wasn’t. The Catholic Church does not affirm that belief. The Church affirms she was a mere creature created perfectly by God. A model for all Christians.

Mary said do what ever he says. Can you imagine what it was to hold the son of God in your womb??

God perfected her in every way and made her full of grace.

Yes she was divine. How many of us could or even would watch our son die on a cross for all??

You are very wrong and incorrect. No she** was not divine**. I don’t know who taught you bad catechizes, but the Catholic Church does not believe that Mary was divine. She had only one nature, human.

If you claim that she was divne. She would be like her son, Jesus who have both a human nature and divine nature. Mary was not. She was a human person.


#9

No the Catholic Church does not believe this. Name the document to support your claim, but Mary is not omnipotent. She is gifted with the beatific vision same as the other saints; but Mary according to Catholic Church is not omnipotent.

Blinky, I ask that you do not spread false doctrine concerning Mary because the Catholic Church does not affirm this sort of belief.


#10

Omnipotent means that she is taught to be all powerful, just like God.


#11

No, our Lady is NOT divine, or omnipotent. What power she has is only through God. You need to learn the difference between God, and somebody who works for Him.


#12

…and the Catholic Church does not teach that Mary is Omnipotent. There is no Church document from the Magisterium to indict that Mary is omnipotent. I like to make that pretty clear to you, Atemi.

I think this thread is rather misleading, especially if Catholic want to clarify any issues concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary.


#13

Here is a link to a critique in the form of a conversation with a Protestant and Dave Armstrong on this subject.

socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/does-st-alphonsus-de-liguori-in-glories.html


#14

The Glories of Mary says that Mary is “omnipotent”: all powerful.
The Glories of Mary also has the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur of the Catholic Church and was written by a Catholic Saint.

This is not rocket science, really.


#15

Tell me is the Glories an writing of Pope or a writing of the Magisterium?

Liguori, the Redemptrist priest who wrote it applied poetry to impress his love of Mary, much like a husband would write a letter to his wife.

The Glories of Mary is not part of official teaching of the Magisterium. Liguori himself was no Pope. I know Non-Catholic use his writings to down play “hey” this canonize saint says Mary is omnipotent. Gotcha, the CC got it wrong therefore it is not the Church of God. It’s departed from the truth.

You have to show me an official Magisterium document that proves his writings to be infallible. Well, I don’t think you can find one because the Catholic Church doesn’t teach it.

Just because it has been labeled Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, it isn’t an infallible statement. Mary’s Omnipotent is not even taught in the Catechism.


#16

As the Roman Empire advanced, often it was happy to allow people to follow their own religions, but would often “adjust them” to be compatible with the Empire.

I’d heard many level at the Church that she took Pagan festivals and Christianised them ,but I was chatting to a historian the other day who says that was in fact done by the Roman Empire, not the Church. The Roman empire absorbed the various religions of the people she overcame.

So it could easily have happened that “over-veneration” (eg Omnipotent) of Mary arose as Christianity kind of “beat and absorbed” pagan (goddess-worshipping) ideologies. I am not sure if this would have happened pre or post Constantine, though.
However, he was pivotal in Christianising the Pagans after he converted, of course.


#17

Wrong - the Church as a whole has never taught, either officially or unofficially, that Mary is omnipotent. And I’m sorry, Doctor of the Church thought he may be, Liguori is NOT infallible in the slightest, nor would the opinion that Mary is omnipotent be anything other than his very very minority opinion, if that.

I don’t think even Liguori would in so many words say Mary is omni-anything. Atemi, give us a quote of his (in context, thanks) that says Mary is of her own (rather than through the grace of God) gifted wth ANY power, let alone an omni-power.

On the contrary, if I understand correctly Liguori begins the Glories of Mary by re-emphasising that Mary is creature, infinitely less than her Creator in every way.


#18

Lily M, why did you quote me?


#19

You’d think that somebody who spends so much time finding fault with Catholicism would understand by now that an Imprimatur is not an infallible guarantee. But I guess I’m expecting too much. Oh well…

There are also times when I wish Ligouri had never written his hyperbolic book. If one knows what the Church teaches about Mary, the book can be understood for what it is. But if one is not well-grounded in the Church’s teachings, I think the book could be problematic. And then there’s the fact that it sends each new generation of American Fundamentalists into siezures and palpitations. That part is rather amusing, actually.


#20

Because you talked about wide-spread ‘over’ veneration of Mary. Which never is and never has been either widespread or part of Church teaching.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.