Posted on 12/14/2014 11:57:21 AM PST by ealgeone
The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.
Is the Hail Mary and other verbal paragraphs addressed to Mary prayers?
But in the Catholic world Mary travels freely between heaven and earth don’t ya know.
Mary is a mediator?
I am not so certain that this will satisfy you. I am not certain that I want to go further down this road. I never knew that there were people who think that they departed relatives are dead. That is new to me and I find it, well, sad.
Oh Gamecock.........
I don’t think it’s a matter of understanding as much as an unwillingness to accept it.
It would mess up all kinds of their theology if they admitted that those they prayed to were dead. Then they couldn’t try to justify praying to them.
I know you stated you are not a theologian, neither am I but familiar with some of the Church history with regards to your statement above. "Cooperating" with the graces of God is a semi-pelagian construct. Here is some information on the subject:
Council of Orange: was called by Pope Felix IV in 529 A.D
The Council approved the Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace over against what would be called Semi-Pelagianism, but without Augustine's absolute predestination. The Canons of the Council of Orange constitute the judgement of the Council.
"Humanism, in all its subtle forms, recapitulates the unvarnished Pelagianism against which Augustine struggled. Though Pelagius was condemned as a heretic by Rome, and its modified form, Semi-Pelagianism was likewise condemned by the Council of Orange in 529, the basic assumptions of this view persisted throughout church history to reappear in Medieval Catholicism, Renaissance Humanism, Socinianism, Arminianism, and modern Liberalism." R. C. Sproul(http://www.theopedia.com/Council_of_Orange)
More:
Semi-Pelagianism is a weaker form of Pelagianism (a heresy derived from Pelagius who lived in the 5th century A.D. and was a teacher in Rome). Semi-Pelagianism (advocated by Cassian at Marseilles, 5th Century) did not deny original sin and its effects upon the human soul and will; but, it taught that God and man cooperate to achieve man's salvation. This cooperation is not by human effort as in keeping the law but rather in the ability of a person to make a free will choice. The semi-Pelagian teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will, and that man can cooperate with God's grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort. This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of person, and that God's grace is not absolutely necessary to maintain faith.
The problem is that this is no longer grace. Grace is the completely unmerited and freely given favor of God upon the sinner; but, if man is the one who first seeks God, then God is responding to the good effort of seeking him. This would mean that God is offering a proper response to the initial effort of man. This is not grace but what is due the person who chooses to believe in God apart from God's initial effort.
• Semi-Pelagianism says the sinner has the ability to initiate belief in God.
• Semi-Pelagianism says God's grace is a response to man's initial effort.
• Semi-Pelagianism denies predestination.
Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Council of Orange in 529.(http://carm.org/semi-pelagianism)
It's just Jesus Christ and His apostles never connected those dots; nor did the Holy Spirit inspiring the written scriptures.
Because they are contrary to what is taught in scripture. Because they teach things that scripture says are forbidden. Because they do things that God called an abomination. Because they teach things that Paul said anyone who teaches what they didn't should be considered accursed.
>>If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church<<
It says "tell it to the "assembly" not some conglomerate the Catholic Church has established. The "assembly" was the local assembly of those who regularly meet. The Catholic Church has totally corrupted the meaning of the word "ekklesia".
>>these strong words from the Son of God emphasize the necessity of free obedience to the authority of the Church<<
No they do not. There is no "authority of the church". It was the people who met together in the local "assembly" who decided who they should continue to allow to meet with them. Not some ruling conglomerate.
>>Here God himself has promised to sustain his Church.<<
And we can be assured that is NOT the paganistic Catholic Church.
It's obvious the you have fallen for the propaganda of the Catholic Church just as Mormons have of theirs and Muslims have of theirs. Scripture however exposes them all as frauds. It's why none of them will allow for scripture alone to be used as the foundation of their beliefs.
So while you accept the words of the Catholic Church don't expect those who "search the scriptures daily to see if what they say is true" to be impressed with the twisting and changing of the words of scripture that come out of that apostate organization.
What if YOU'RE wrong?
I guess it gets back, again, to the basics. Is Scripture the infallible, inerrant word of God?
If it is, is it then THE standard by which all truth claims need to be measured?
If a teaching is in clear agreement with Scripture, can we then be sure we're right?
If Scripture can be shown to contradict the truth claims of a church, there are two options. Either the church accepts the correction and adjusts it's theology, doctrine, whatever, OR, it continues on its merry way, falling deeper and deeper into error and deception.
Indeed, Scripture DOES contain some things that are hard to understand, and some that seem to be able to be equally supported with strong arguments from Scripture but that is not nearly the majority of Scripture. It's a few things.
There is plenty of leeway in what Paul refers to as disputable matters which can be found addressed in Romans 14.
Absolute compliance with the dictates of a church's governing body are no requirement for salvation according to Scripture.
You can take that up with a priest. Lawyers. I make a whole post in good faith trying to explain to someone who really doesn’t care, they just like to ridicule and you pick one sentence and go to town. So fine you have had your fun. Have a great day.
The same Book of Revelation in which Roman Catholics tell us is full of symbols/allegory and should not be taken literally?
Revelation 5:
8 Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
The four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, each having...and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. So the prayers are of the saints. Saints would be those who are in Christ Jesus, not the later understanding of Roman Catholics. So the passage is not saying people offer the prayers to saints or through saints but of saints. There is a significant difference.
And if we are to take this eisegesis of the passage as presented, then there are only 24 'saints' before the throne of God in Heaven, and four living creatures. So which ordained Roman Catholic saints would that be so Catholics can focus on the ones which can only hear or present prayers?
I pointed out the one statement because it has bearing on the entire paragraph/argument.
Maybe that's why they go to Mary, though not mentioned at all, she MUST be passing along bowls of prayers. I guess they will have to name the four living creatures so they can pray to them. The four living creatures and Mary, that's the ticket.
I apologize to all readers for my post 1855. Just had a moment of inspiration which should have been quashed with a bucket of water. Sorry ‘bout that.
R2z
Or anywhere around the throne of God where she is purported to be now.
Instead of answering my question, you tried to turn it back to me.
I could answer your question, as I have considered it.
You don’t need to respond to me or this forum. This is just a question for you to consider honestly.
I am not sure if you fully considered that the Catholic Church speaks for Christ like Moses did in the OT.
May God’s Peace be with you.
You can ask the RM to remove the post. Using the abuse button on your self works.
Trust me, I know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.