A Protestant Discovers Mary

NC Register ^ | March 13, 2010

[Belteshazzar]

You are shouting. And you seem to be assuming some things that were neither said nor intimated.

Is there a difference between the Presence and the Ark? Well, duh, of course.

And yet is there an identification of one with the other? Well, duh, of course.

Why did God identify the ark and the tabernacle/temple that enclosed it with His Presence? And, corollary to that, how did so many in Israel misinterpret God’s stated intent and so begin to wander from the way of life?

Is there a danger here to us, “upon whom the ends of the ages have come”?

Is it possible that the fine line to be observed here is the very line that divided the Pharisees from the Sadducees, and so showed both to be out of line? Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Son of Man, did not contend with these two parties by chance. There is something very important here. The errant theology of each did not arise out of nothing.

Do you want to discuss and discover ... or just shout?

[Quix]

I have known folks in congregations I’ve been a part of who were over the line into worshipping the printed Scriptures. I was dangerously close, myself during parts of my life.

However, I haven’t observed it to be a ragingly common thing. And at it’s worst, it was still greatly different—greatly less in intensity and focus than what I’ve observed with respect to Mary et al.

The people overly focused on the Printed Scriptures STILL would have insisted, though somewhat inaccurately, consciously and verbally that they were NOT obsessed with the printed Scriptures but were instead focusing on their Author.

[Cronos]

These words are directing you to God. Let me make this clear — The Church still debates over these visions and these are no way the dogma or the defining point of The Faith, neither is the Turin shroud for example. I, personally, do not focus on these apparitions or even glance at them — their credence and/or veracity neither add to nor subtract from my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but I do say that they are not satanic in their intent and purpose.

[Quix]

You are welcome to be distracted by my style and font use, if you prefer.

It would be interesting to know what leads you to ASSUME, PRESUME

that CAPS = shouting vs raised eyebrows, raised tone, lowered tone, intense eyes tone, curious face tone, angled head emphasis etc.

Would be happy to read what you’re getting at vis a vis the scribes and pharisees.

[Belteshazzar]

Quix wrote:

“I have known folks in congregations I’ve been a part of who were over the line into worshipping the printed Scriptures. I was dangerously close, myself during parts of my life.

However, I haven’t observed it to be a ragingly common thing. And at it’s worst, it was still greatly different—greatly less in intensity and focus than what I’ve observed with respect to Mary et al.

The people overly focused on the Printed Scriptures STILL would have insisted, though somewhat inaccurately, consciously and verbally that they were NOT obsessed with the printed Scriptures but were instead focusing on their Author.”

You have put your finger directly on the same point that Cronos, by his own words, indicated. You have put your finger directly on that of which I am NOT speaking. There, maybe if I shout a tiny bit, you will take me seriously.

[Quix]

I take you seriously whether you use CAPS or not.

I just happen to enjoy the variety that different fonts, colors and CAPS afford in this VERY NARROWLY limited communication mode.

[Quix]

Perhaps you lost sight of the

“inaccurately” because it wasn’t in CAPS.

[Grunthor]

“A Protestant Discovers Mary”

That’s silly, we Protestants know who Mary is quite well.

[Cronos]

1. The diversity of basic dogma does not exist within The Church -- we have a basic, common, CATHOLIC understanding of dogma

2. Incidently about the dogma of IC -- I was reading up about this and I see references to this dating back to the apocryphal Gospels in the 1st century that recount the grace of the meeting of her parents Joachim and Anne and also in the epistles of Ireneus from 170 AD and in the writings of Ephream and St. Ambrose and explicitly in St. Augustine stating her to be free from original sin. From this narrative is derived the feast of Anne's conception of Mary in Byzantine liturgy, celebrated since the eighth century on December 9th

This feast was introduced in the West around the 10th century, and it celebrates explicitly the Conception of Mary without original sin. The feast was extended to the universal calendar by Sixtus IV in 1476 with a very beautiful formulation, but sadly reduced to a simple memorial of the "Conception of Mary" in the Missal of 1570. Duns Scotus gives the theological key to understand the mystery of how she was saved through the grace of God, through her savior, her son, in a special way, filled with grace.

[Marysecretary]

I couldn’t figure out what he was talking about.

[Belteshazzar]

“Would be happy to read what you’re getting at vis a vis the scribes and pharisees.”

OK. That is all I am asking. Again, it may well be that in your mind adding color and caps to what you say is not the equivalent of shouting. I will extend you the courtesy of taking you at your word. But, please understand, it does appear that way, at least to some. Remember what Teddy Roosevelt said, “Speak without caps and colors, but carry a big stick.” ... or something like that.

Here is the point. The Sadducees, who held the office of high priest most often, were content to be in charge of the temple and its rites. In these things they placed their trust. And in this they were united. They tended to understand the government/organization (call it what you will) of the faithful as being a top down arrangement with themselves, naturally, at the top. The Pharisees, who were more numerous, were insistent about their personal piety and a personal relationship with God founded on said piety. And in this they were united. They tended to understand the government/organization of the faithful as being a bottom up arrangement with themselves, naturally, as the best exemplars.

Jesus called them both wrong.

My interest is in this: How did they get to be the way they were? Are their aberrations not recorded as examples for our learning/admonition also even as St. Paul said in 1 Corinthians of Israel in the wilderness?

So, there you are. Unfortunately, I have to go to work and will have to leave this discussion for now.

[Theo]

1) Of course the Church is an “institution.” Christ instituted it.

2) Yes, I agree with you that the Church is the bride of Christ. The thing is, I believe the Head of the Church is Christ, and that He is the Author of our faith; you believe the Head of the Church is Rome, and that the RCC is the repository of our faith. I look to Christ, the Head of His Church, not to Rome. Christ is my intercessor, not Rome.

You speak of a “gloom that is prevalent outside” your denomination. Hm. I’m not seeing it. I’m seeing fullness of joy in Christ, our Savior and gracious Lord.

[roamer_1]

These words are directing you to God.

No they are not. They are directing toward the purported Mary as a figure of salvation and power. Then she (in the Roman tradition) is supposed to direct you toward God.

The ONLY figure of salvation and power is the Christ. The whole of the Prophecy proclaims it. Ergo, the prophecy in question leads AWAY from the Truth, not toward it. NO creature has the power ascribed by this "being". No creature can have the power to promise in the first person. No creature has the right to have anything consecrated to it, not to mention whole nations.

It is false on it's face, with nary a doubt or defense.

Let me make this clear — The Church still debates over these visions and these are no way the dogma or the defining point of The Faith, neither is the Turin shroud for example. I, personally, do not focus on these apparitions or even glance at them — their credence and/or veracity neither add to nor subtract from my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but I do say that they are not satanic in their intent and purpose.

Yes, you do well to distance yourself from this monstrous vision. If it is not of God, not of Christ's testimony (which is the Spirit of Prophecy), the only other thing it could be is Antichrist.

[Cronos]

The tricky thing is that it can be so easy to fall into heresy. What’s even easier is to follow it blindly. I’ve met simple folks who are catholics, orthodox, baptist, etc. who do not really debate on strong theological issues, but honestly — they’re more Christian than most of us “intellectuals”.

[Cronos]

In fact, it tends to get them shouting at each other pretty quickly.

The shouting serves no purpose -- the moment one starts shouting, the other stops listening. It's the worst way to make your point as then, even if you are correct, no one will listen to you.

[Belteshazzar]

Cronos said:

“The tricky thing is that it can be so easy to fall into heresy. What’s even easier is to follow it blindly. I’ve met simple folks who are catholics, orthodox, baptist, etc. who do not really debate on strong theological issues, but honestly — they’re more Christian than most of us “intellectuals”.”

Sadly, you are right. I have had the same experience. And yet, for some reason, Christ charged His disciples, frail and sinful men all, to preach and teach. In view of this, it is good for us to take Him and His Word very seriously and ourselves not too seriously at all. As one wise man said, “Don’t take yourself or this life too seriously, you won’t get out of it alive anyway” ... except, of course, in Christ.

Now I really have to run.

[Quix]

Thanks.

I’m well aware of the net conventions and assumptions about CAPS. I’ve had a terminal or computer in my home since 1976.

I’ve long been known to march to a different drummer from that of the masses.

Thanks for elaborating on your points.

I’d like you to tease out, when you’re available again, a bit more about Christ’s declarations about their being wrong and what He insisted was right, instead.

It seems to me that Christ insisted that an ongoing RELATIONSHIP VIA HIS BLOOD BOUGHT SALVATION—and our acceptance of Him as our Savior—AN ONGOING RELATIONSHIP with The Father, Son, Holy Spirit was the key issue.

. . . a dance . . . with God . . . so to speak.

[Quix]

Plenty true.

[Quix]

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

VERY WELL PUT.

THX.

[Quix]

AMEN! AMEN!