Posted on 02/15/2010 9:07:17 AM PST by GonzoII
The Scenario:
Ever have one of those days when you’re feeling full of energy and vigor? I mean, you’re feeling just obnoxiously happy? Well, this is one of those days.
Driving home from work, you switch on the radio to see what’s happening, and you tune in to a local Protestant radio station just in time to hear a preacher speaking against various Catholic doctrines concerning Mary. The show is called Pastor Bob’s Bible Hour. Pastor Bob proclaims: “Jesus knew Catholics would come along and begin to worship His mother and call her perpetual virgin and absurd things like that. But the Bible says: ‘Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brethren James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all of His sisters with us?’ (Matt. 13:55-56a). And isn’t it sad, my brothers and sisters?”
Pastor Bob goes on to say: “Jesus dealt with these Mary worshippers in His day. In Luke 11:27-28, the Bible says, ‘A woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts that You sucked!” But He said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”’”
On a normal day you would probably just listen, take a few mental notes and drive on. But not this time. You’re feeling a little bit too saucy. You take the first exit you see and head for a phone. This is just one more reason why you need to buy that cell phone you’ve been talking about getting.
Step One:
(Excerpt) Read more at envoymagazine.com ...
St. Peter was the one who brought in the first Gentile and proposed, at the Jerusalem Council, doing away with the Mosaic dietetic and ceremonial law. When St. criticized his habits, that was because S.t Peter's habits were out of synch with Peter's own understanging of the universality of the Church.
When did he become pope ?
One event in the scripture that points to Peter's actual assuming of the papacy is the "feed my lambs" passage at the end of the gospel of John.
The question isn’t about seeking insight the question is whether God speaking needs to be filtered through a human institution before it’s basic premises can be understood? Placing the Institution’s teaching at a level equal to or greater than God speaking is to put God one level away from mans conscience.
There was a Reformation once upon a time that discussed these very issues.
As a simple woman who loves God, I simply feel we should also remember that the gospel paints a big picture of love. A love so great He gave His only begotten Son.
It is so hard to comprehend the extent of that love.
I realize that Jesus sanctified everything He touched.
As a woman I realize that motherhood is an important blessing and responsibility, and good christian woman are absolutely necessary in God's plan of salvation. Blessed Mary set a standard.
A holy family should be our objective. Fathers are intended be the priests of their families and look to Jesus for strength. Community is brotherhood in God's kingdom. If one of us falls, we are all hurt. We are all called to sacrifice and love each other. This goes against everything "the world" tells us. It is the Grace of God that allows us to hear and understand. Not everyone has that.
Everytime the apostles questioned who was more important, and questioned the true meaning of Jesus' parables, Jesus questioned their faith.
God loves us beyond our wildest imaginations, we have to strive to form our will to His. Tonight maybe we can all pray for each other, regardless of religion? I will.
Yes, of course. Like I said, the Invisible Universal Church of the Elect because of it's union with Christ would never pretend to place anything between the Elect and Christ. Thus anyone within the Catholic Church would find it abhorrent to place an institution between Christ and themselves.
I recommend you read your posting history.
I've implicated who is a member of the Invisible Universal Church of the Elect? I don't think so. It's blasphemy to pretend to know God's eternal decrees. I can only accept a person's profession and trust they are a member of the Invisible Universal Church of the Elect.
Yes, exactly: that is why I posted it.
“What you are dong, systematically, is minimizing, even trivilaizing the gospel you don’t like.”
Actually I do like the Gospels and I study them often. For instance rather than reading more into an historical vignette concerning an embarrassing incident at a wedding feast I said it was the first recorded miracle that Jesus performed. That’s all that John wrote. The same with Jesus’ statement to John and Mary at the cross. It was a cultural tradition for the eldest to take care of his widowed mother and that is what Jesus did.
Now I suppose one could read more into these situations but that would be just speculation. They are not didactic moments; no profound teaching is there except the display of Jesus’ humanity; his caring for the wedding host and guest and the caring for his widowed mother.
“That Mary is to be venerated”
Mary is to be honored because God chose her to be Jesus’ mother.
I often pray for non-Catholics, and if the conversion of the Protestants were not my desire, I would not be posting anything here.
That is not exactly "all"; Mary had a role in it that was significant. Besides, the question was posed to explain the intercession of saints and that particular episode explains that. There are, of course others. The pattern of someone asking for another and Jesus after some apparent delay answering is repeated several times in the gospel.
“Yes, I’m not sure I understand that question.”
Here is the full scope of my question:
a) Did Mary, who gave birth to the Savior at Bethlehem, require that Savior to shed His Blood for HER sins?
[Earlier in post # 569, Petronski said, “Of course she needed a Savior. She said so.” This led to my part b)]
b) If Mary had no sins, but yet required a Savior, as she said she did, then from WHAT did she require a Savior?
Yes, Jesus came to save the world, as you say, and He did so by shedding His Blood and dying for the SINS of the world. If He hadn’t died for the SINS of the world, the world could not have been saved. The issue of the Cross was SIN/SINS and payment therefore.
So, we are speaking of Mary, specifically, the Mary who gave birth to Jesus, and we are asking,
c) Did Christ not only die for the SINS of the world in general, but did He shed His Blood and die for Mary’s SINS in particular?
Reference?????
Lent is utterly pagan, and has nothing to do with Christ or his word. Try again.
And yes, I know that I am saved; all those that are saved know it, because it is part of believing and trusting the Lord.
Somewhere along the line you stopped talking about the Catholic Church.
But that's okay, because that garbage you spouted before does not apply to the Catholic Church, and that was my main concern.
I am NOT saying you broke any rules.
I was only trying to warn that you might have been at issue with the rules (as I understood them).
What a horrible thing to post.
I won’t even repeat it
Luke 1:38 clears it up, not 1:35
Right. That was when I started talking about Romanism.
But that's okay, because that garbage you spouted before does not apply to the Catholic Church, and that was my main concern.
Right. The garbage of Romanism does not apply to the Invisible Catholic Church.
Most non-Catholics are aware that Catholics regard Mary as preserved from all sin by God's gift. So, to ask if Christ shed His blood for Mary's "SINS" is attempted entrapment and game-playing, in my opinion.
Wrong.
That garbage you spouted before does not apply to the Catholic Church.
When a poster has been instructed to leave the thread, the poster should not be pinged because he cannot reply.
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.