Well, it is not a matter of the Pope's innate wisdom per sec that leads loyal Catholics to obey, but the fact that we understand that God works powerfully through his teachings - even if not infallible, they rate our obedience, as Hebrews 13:17 (among others) states :"Listen to your pastors, and do not resist them, for they watch for your souls as those that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief; for that [is] unprofitable for you."
An interesting note is the definition of "catholic". It means more than "universal". It means "the totality" or "the whole of the parts". Thus, it can be said that there is no such thing as a cafeteria Catholic. By picking and choosing, you de facto say you are not "Catholic". Thus, we follow everything that is legitimately taught to us. You would, too, if you accepted the Church's establishment is based on the Foundation, Jesus Christ.
I had no idea about the connection between Mary and Eve.
When I teach people about Mary, I focus on the early Church's connection between the two (which is a natural parallel that Paul makes with Jesus and Adam).
Here is an example:
God, by a rival method, restored His image and likeness...For into Eve when she was yet a virgin had crept the word that established death, likewise, into a Virgin was to be brought the Word of God that produced life; so that what had gone to ruin by the one sex might be restored to salvation by the same sex. (Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ, c. 200 AD)
There are similar such quotes by St. Justin the Martyr in 150 and St. Ireneaus in 180 AD. They saw that the disobedience of Adam and Eve should be canceled out in the SAME manner by the obedience of two people. These people would be similar, also - Since Adam and Eve were born sinless, and Jesus was born sinless, then the Church viewed Mary, also, as sinless. Thus, the argument for the Immaculate Conception was very early, an idea that no one refuted.
I understand how you could say that. As for myself, I certainly do not believe that the Spirit bypasses Catholics and only leads Protestants. And on this thread, among other Protestants, I don't feel lonely at all in this view.
As I have said elsewhere, the Spirit operates on two levels within the Church. The first level is for our individual sanctification. While the Sacraments are the par excellence of God's coming to us, we also can receive Him during prayer and Scripture meditation, for example. Certainly, Protestants are quite open to receiving the Spirit in this manner. The second level is the Spirit guarding the teachings of the Christ. Christ is not visibly present on earth for all time, so to maintain what HE taught, we must rely on some divinely-guided body to ensure that men (who are wounded of intellect) do not stray over hundreds of years of Christianity from God's teachings. This second level is given to the Bishops, those men following in the footsteps of the Apostles (this laying of hands, the passing of the torch, is clearly seen in the Pastorals).
But, getting back to your point, it appears you are saying that the lost person never gets to the stage of turning down a sure thing because he first rejects the required faith. OK, but you would have to admit that the person still has no conception of what he is rejecting. Else, he would obviously accept the gift. That was my point. With fair knowledge, who would say 'No'?
People have various levels of faith (due to their own disbelief or skepticism). A person can have an intellectual faith, but it does not lead us to love. I know this from experience, as my first 6 months in Christianity was like that. Intellectual with little love. A person who rejects God at that stage certainly does not know what He is rejecting OR He doesn't have a strong enough faith to believe that it is really true. What is "fair knowledge"? I am sure that both of us are aware of people who have fallen away from Christianity, in some cases, many years after following Christ. The problem is often skepticism creeps in. Or a strong presence of evil appears. But knowledge is not enough to hold us to God. It requires an ongoing relationship with Christ.
Regards
That's interesting. Then what would you call what I would call a "cafeteria Catholic"? (We have the same of course.) Are people like Kerry and Kennedy "not Catholics"? As an outsider, I would say 'YES' to this, but my opinion doesn't count :) What do you say about clergy continuing to administer sacraments to such people?
I am sure that both of us are aware of people who have fallen away from Christianity, in some cases, many years after following Christ. The problem is often skepticism creeps in. Or a strong presence of evil appears. But knowledge is not enough to hold us to God. It requires an ongoing relationship with Christ.
Yes, an ongoing relationship is critical. I sure am aware of people who have fallen away after professing a faith. My own mother was like this, until she died two years ago. When I adopted "perseverance of the saints" it was a particularly bitter pill to swallow because of what I had to then admit. For her, I had clinged to "once saved always saved". But, I did feel led, so I have to just deal with it. I can't know with absolute certainty until I'm there, so I'll just have to wait.