Church of Rome – Marian legends and Infancy Gospel of James

Deutsch

Mary is undisputedly the center of the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus Christ was, at best, brought into Mary’s presence as an infant, but otherwise relegated to the margins. The legends surrounding Mary are so fanciful that the biblical evidence that should have been used is summarily declared completely unnecessary. This is done with bizarre justifications. Furthermore, the stories surrounding Mary are based on a work that professes paganism, the “Infancy Gospel of James.”

Faith by instruction

Mary’s physical Assumption into Heaven does not need to be proven. This is not necessary, according to a Roman Catholic priest in an article in “catholic.com“. This is not changed by the fact that the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary was established as dogmatic by the Church of Rome, “much surprisingly,” very late, only in 1950. Pope Pius XII decreed—and here comes the kicker—that all Catholics must recognize and believe this doctrine as “divine revelation.” The Pope decrees, dictates, and the flock is obligated to accept the Pope’s faith without question.

The Pope’s faith is a duty for all

Well, this is in the DNA of this church and is also enshrined in church law. Absolute submission and unquestioning faith in whatever is exuded from the belly of St. Peter’s Basilica (Isis’ belly). The Diocese of Augsburg declares this (Source):
“The Church, too, maintains that the faithful in general, and the ministers of the Church in particular, must obey the Pope and the bishop. “Obedience” has a spiritual meaning in the Church.”

This demand is based, according to the diocese, on the fact that Jesus is the head of the Church and on the statement in Philippians 2:8:
“And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.“

The “Codex Iuris Canonici (CIC)”, Canon 212, paragraph 1, states:
“Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.“

It followed that the pontiff’s dictates of faith, in the true sense of the word, who is, after all, the earthly representative of Jesus, constituted equal to God, must be of the same divinity and therefore infallible. The inability of the pope to fall into error had been proclaimed for centuries, but it was also very late in establishing it as an irrefutable doctrine with the First Vatican Council (1869-1870, Pope Pius XI).

Yet both subtle and malicious. CIC 212 emphasizes that believers should act according to their own responsibility (conscience). While a religious standard is enforced, deviations are judged as heresy, and even punished with death, “we told you to follow your own conscience. Thus, it was your free decision.” Bitter, but true. For God prevents man from being deceived without ever having had a chance to recognize the truth or follow his conscience (the Holy Spirit). A principle that applies not only to religion but also to politics and geopolitics.

Evidence for Maria legend unnecessary

This legally mandated, compulsory belief thus also applies to the doctrine that Mary was assumed into heaven. Any view deviating from this, especially those concerning Mary, is thus automatically heresy. Even before 1798, adherence to heresy, despite the opportunity to recant, regularly resulted in the murder of the declared heretic, or alternatively, being sold for cash to row on the galleys.

In his contribution, the priest emphasizes that the Bible “says nothing directly about the Ascension.” This also applies to Mary’s life after Pentecost and also to her death. (Even) the Protestant evangelist Scot McKnight pointed out that God certainly has the power to take people to heaven, the priest said. The logic that serves this purpose is that something does not necessarily have to be impossible just because it has not been reported.

Therefore, the approach of the “early Church” was not to search for proof texts, but to determine whether the doctrine of Mary’s Ascension was consistent with all “Holy Scriptures” and “other Christian doctrines.” At this point, the priest asks why the Church waited so long to establish Mary’s Ascension as doctrine. However, an answer remains unanswered, instead offering a conjecture:
“Perhaps the Holy Spirit had waited to counteract the materialistic and mechanistic view propagated by some in the name of science.“

May the Assumption of Mary be an amplifier of faith

A reversal of cause and effect promptly follows. Mary’s Assumption is not proof of the “Christian hope of a bodily resurrection,” but leads to this belief because of its affirming nature. A testimony, the priest says, to the “spiritual dimension” of humankind, “which lasts for all eternity.” And one of the serpent’s first lies in the Garden of Eden is already incorporated into the argument: the lie about the immortal soul. (Info).

Another statement by the priest is downright revealing. The quasi-enlightenment of humanity regarding Mary’s Ascension into Heaven was, he claims, caused by the Holy Spirit. For this reason, the Holy Spirit “examined the Old Testament” for evidence and led the early Christians to the realization that Mary was the “Ark of the New Covenant.” The Catholic cleric cites Revelation 11:19 and Revelation 12:5 as supposed biblical evidence.

Mary-friendly interpretation

“And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament:” (Revelation 11:19).
Those who read in context know better. This Ark of the Covenant is the actual Ark, which contains the two tablets of God’s Law. Moreover, at the time of the 7th trumpet, the presentation of God’s Ten Commandments, it is the standard and basis for the final judgment of the eternally just God.

“And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.” (Revelation 12:5)
This (symbolic) woman is not Mary herself. The woman clothed with the sun and standing on the moon, with a crown on her head and 12 stars above her, is a representation of the (ancient) people of Israel, the people of God, from whom Jesus (the tribe of Judah) emerged. The Church of Rome also teaches that the birth of Jesus for Mary was “miraculously” painless. But Revelation 12:2 describes:
“And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.“

Holy Spirit must “investigate”?!

The real crux of the matter is the priest’s account that the Holy Spirit searched the Old Testament to gather evidence of Mary’s Assumption and then communicated it to the early Christians. To avoid the word “rambling,” the simple but compelling question is, “What is the priest writing about?” So the Holy Spirit must first search the Old Testament to gain knowledge himself before he can impart his knowledge?

Just 2 Timothy 3:16:
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:“

To take the wind out of the sails at this point, I would also like to point out that “all Scripture” refers to the Gospel that had already been completed at the time of the Apostles, and not to any later published pseudo-writings and personal opinions that the Church of Rome continued as tradition and dictate of faith, Galatians 1:6-8:
“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.“

The Catholic priest’s argument regarding the justification for the Assumption of Mary is very flowery, but almost empty in content. The actual statements contained therein are simply untrue. If a claim cannot be substantiated, the proof is simply declared unnecessary. This is the presentation of the philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church, as it lives and breathes it.

Gentile writing “Infancy Gospel of James”

Among the original teachings of the Church of Rome is, in particular, the “Immaculateness of Mary.” She is said to be without sin, without blemish, the “specially favored by God.” Who were Mary’s parents? Nothing of this can be found in the Bible, just as there is no indication that Mary was or remained without sin. On what “illuminations” is this legend based?

A book, a so-called Protoevangelium, actually exists, which attempts to describe Mary’s “development.” It is the “Infancy Gospel of James.” It was written around 150 AD and has not even found a place in the canon of the Roman Catholic Church. This document was “rediscovered” by the Frenchman Guillaume Postel in the 16th century. Postel, a humanist and Jesuit, considered it the prequel to the “Gospel of Mark,” had it translated into Latin, and circulated in 1552. Further translations into other languages followed very quickly, and the book became widely distributed.

Despite its highly questionable origins, this text provides a basis for the myths and legends surrounding Mary that are circulating today. Alternatively, this pseudo-text may have served to confirm the Catholic clergy’s wishful thinking, which was implemented as a forced doctrine. The work’s address to James also goes back to Catholic tradition.

In-depth study not necessary

Even a superficial glance at the “Infancy Gospel of James” is revealing.

According to this account, Mary’s parents were the very wealthy Joachim and the Hebrew Anna. Apparently modeled on the childlessness of Abraham and Sarah, Joachim and Anna also waited and prayed for years for the birth of a child. “Anna’s womb remained closed,” however, until finally an angel came and told Anna the good news of God’s grace. She would have a child. Anna named her daughter Mary, and through God’s special grace, she was freed from original sin.

Stark contradictions

As a 3-year-old, Mary was placed on the third step of the altar by a priest. At the age of 12, the transition to adulthood, a priest went into the Holy of Holies of the Temple with 12 small bells to pray for Mary.

The mere fact that Mary was placed on the third step of the altar is revealing. First, no one else had any business at the altar of the Temple except the priests themselves. Second, only the altars of the pagans and their pseudo-gods stood on a gallery (as they do in the Catholic Church today), while the altar of God was placed at ground level in the courtyard. There were no steps.

A priest (not the High Priest) entering the Holy of Holies in the middle of the year? Truly, the priest wouldn’t have survived that. Only once a year, specifically on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kipphur on the 10th of Tishri), was the High Priest alone permitted to enter the Holy of Holies, after days of thorough self-purification.

Mary was responsible for purple and scarlet

Another interesting aspect of the “Infancy Gospel of James” is that Mary received the angel’s announcement of the coming birth of Jesus while she was weaving the temple curtain, in purple and scarlet. This is absolutely stunning. The temple curtain is the separation between the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place. It had long been in place and was mandatory, as well as “vital” for all priests entering the sanctuary. It was this curtain that was completely torn from top to bottom at Jesus’ death on the cross (Matthew 27:51).

In “Infancy Gospel of James” it says in chapter 10:
“And the high priest said, Cast lots to see who will spin the gold and the pure and the linen and the silk and the violet and the scarlet and the true purple threads.” And Mary was appointed by lot to the true purple and scarlet threads. And taking them, she went to her house.“

Purple and scarlet for Mary? Very interesting. Revelation 17:3-5 describes:
“So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.“

The blue can still be admired in Roman Catholic churches today. Not in the vestments of the priests (bishop’s purple, cardinal’s scarlet), nor in any curtain, but in the mantle of the ever-present Mary in the form of a statue (idol).

Roman Catholic confession of paganism

The very first chapters of this pseudo-text reveal that the Marian legends are based on pure paganism (Info). Besides the obvious contradictions to the written Word of God, the work is even a frank confession of ancient paganism. Anyone who wants to read it, or who wants to read the entire “Infancy Gospel of James” for purely educational purposes to recognize Roman Catholic anti-Christianity, can find it here.

Furthermore, the language of magicians, testing water, and particularly meaningful rods is the language according to the judgment of God. What else is needed to recognize the Church of Rome as a pseudo-Christian institution? (Info).

Advice

The emphasis is on the paganism of the Roman Catholic Church, not on the deceived individual Catholic. They are most thoroughly urged to take responsibility for themselves, to seek out the Word of God, to open it, and to study it. Assuming prayer before studying for guidance through the Holy Spirit, it will be a great joy to God to lead those seeking the truth to the truth and its knowledge. It is not the collective that will be judged by God, but man as an individual.

Once the truth is recognized, the desire to continue following the one, very narrow path to salvation through Jesus Christ alone (John 14:6) also grows. There is still some time to anticipate the absolutely final call to urgent action:

Bible verses from King James Version (1611)