Replies

I am not saying that the saint had ulterior motives!

Okay. But it kinda sounded like that to me.

God gave Mary a singular grace, making her the greatest of all creation, one who will be called blessed for all generations.

Mary was no more instrumental to the eventual revelation of Christ in the flesh than were many others in scripture. Adam and Eve, Abraham, David, and innumerable others. The vital choices and sacrifices essential to God's plan made by so many others are all set to nought by elevating Mary so far above all others. That all generations shall call her blessed is indisputed. But you are close to elevating her to the status of Christ Himself.

To me, scripture has only one object, one star: Jesus Christ. There are no co-stars, no co-redemptrixes. All of God's glory is focused upon Christ in the person of Jesus. Everyone else is a bit-player in comparison.

Mary did face a number of trials. I do not believe that she had supernatural knowledge. Certainly, choosing to bear child while not married yet subjected her to possible stoning. And whose sorrow exceeds that of the Dolorous Virgin, watching her Son die on a cross, knowing it was God's Will be done and probably not knowing why? No, Mary certainly suffered - a sword pierced her heart, too, at Calvary.

Mary suffered like any human being. But scripture does not attest that she suffered anything comparable to the grisly deaths of the early martyrs of the Church. There is no evidence or testimony of this in the canon.

Well, I assume you are sincere and I'm not trying to suggest you are dishonest in any way. Like any Baptist, I try to stand on scripture's firm ground and understand God's will as best I can. Someone posted earlier on this thread, much as we discussed in the longstanding arguments between Calvinists and Arminians, that sometimes we argue over words whose precise definitions we do not necessarily share. And we all bring hidden personal and cultural and institutional assumptions to our discussion that we may not be fully aware of. This is even true of us Baptists which is probably why there are so many flavors of Baptist. ; )

I try to remember that in these discussion we can sometimes speak at cross-purposes without intending to do so.

Mary was no more instrumental to the eventual revelation of Christ in the flesh than were many others in scripture. Adam and Eve, Abraham, David, and innumerable others. The vital choices and sacrifices essential to God's plan made by so many others are all set to nought by elevating Mary so far above all others. That all generations shall call her blessed is indisputed. But you are close to elevating her to the status of Christ Himself.

Mary was a creation, Jesus was/is God. There is a huge difference right there. If God desires to share His divine nature with creation, why would it seem so strange that He would share glory with others? I see this even in magnanimous humans. Is God not better than such people? No, the Church has not forgotten who God is. Honoring Mary is not putting her on equal footing as Christ. No sacrifice is offered to her, only to God. All graces have their source in God. But is God jealous of Mary? That would seem strange!

To me, scripture has only one object, one star: Jesus Christ. There are no co-stars, no co-redemptrixes. All of God's glory is focused upon Christ in the person of Jesus. Everyone else is a bit-player in comparison.

Strictly speaking, Jesus is the theme of the Scriptures. No doubt. But I see God sharing the limelight with us "two-bit" players, and even the lead charecters...

Mary suffered like any human being. But scripture does not attest that she suffered anything comparable to the grisly deaths of the early martyrs of the Church. There is no evidence or testimony of this in the canon.

I, of course, am not refering to Mary dying a martyr's death!!! The Sword that pierced her heart, as prophesied by Simeon, was a sorrowful sword to her soul, that heart, not the organ that pumps blood! Two people's hearts were pierced at Calvary, one physically, and one spiritually.

Someone posted earlier on this thread, much as we discussed in the longstanding arguments between Calvinists and Arminians, that sometimes we argue over words whose precise definitions we do not necessarily share. And we all bring hidden personal and cultural and institutional assumptions to our discussion that we may not be fully aware of. This is even true of us Baptists which is probably why there are so many flavors of Baptist. ; )

I have said that here and agree with it, as well. Much of our disagreements stem from definitions and our total paradigms on viewing the Scriptures. For example, if one has the idea of the Total Depravity of man, then it is quite easy to dispel the notion, found in Scriptures, that man cannot cooperate with God's graces by twisting the text to mean something else. I would bet that Baptists believe that Catholics do the same thing with other doctrines! Thus, the problem of Scripture without an external authority. You cannot know the TRUTH! That is probably what attracted me to Catholicism the most. They claim to be have the authority given to them from the Apostles. It is a bold truth claim or an ignorant mistake... Obviously, I will hold the former!

Brother in Christ