James Martin, SJ

@JamesMartinSJ

Actually, what I'm promoting is a *reading* of the Gospel. In John, Mary is the first one to whom the Risen Lord appears. For a time, then, only she knew the Paschal Mystery. Thus, she was the proto-church. But don't worry about Mary: she's used to being taken for granted by men.

9:13 PM · Jul 23, 2021·Twitter for Android

181 Retweets

28 Quote Tweets

2,329 Likes

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4200162&forum_id=2:#43125364)

Its funny to me that he would post this, because if Mary is the proto church, then the point that traditionalists have about not having female servers and lectors suddenly makes a lot of sense: Only men can enter the womb of the church.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4200162&forum_id=2:#43285288)

If the sanctuary is feminine than the ministers, who stand in place as the representative husbands, need to be masculine. The obvious example is the priest himself who takes the place of the groom when consecrating the Eucharest.

This doesn't apply as strongly for other ministers (e.g. servers and such) which is why the modernisits try to get their wedge in via that angle (instead of just calling for female priests explicitly). But it still does apply in the same way that the Groom in a wedding is supported and served by his groomsmen. The idea that women should be able to run around in the holiest spot in the church, representative as her womb, is destructive to the faith as it makes a mockery of the entire thing.

The perverse thing in all of this is that modernists and the average person will think that this position is somehow sexist, when in fact it is the exact opposite. The Church is called the Bride of Christ for a reason. Traditional, faithful Catholics, revere the feminine in a way that the modernists and non believers simply do not.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4200162&forum_id=2:#43285500)

I read something recently that’s relevant to this. 2 Samuel 6,1-19 in which David dances when the recovered Ark of the Covenant is brought back to Jerusalem is similar to Luke 1:41 in which John the Baptist jumps in Elizabeth’s womb when Mary arrives carrying Christ in her womb. Mary is the new Ark

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4200162&forum_id=2:#43285767)

Its funny to me that Prots will have a pretty low bar when it comes to Jesus typology in the OT, but suddenly they turn into uber skeptics with Mary.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4200162&forum_id=2:#43286195)