Replies

Ealgone, I think what's happening here is that you're not discerning different levels of honor.

Nope. I worship and pray only to God. I acknowledge Mary was the mother of Christ and she is blessed among women for this. I also acknowledge that Paul was the writer of the bulk of the NT. However, I do not worship or pray to Mary or Paul or any other Christian. Nor did Mary, Peter, Paul, etc. Do I respect what Paul, Peter, James and the other apostles did? Yes. Do I respect what Mary did? Yes. However, my respect for Mary is limited to what the Bible teaches about her. I do not accord her anything beyond what we have in the Bible.

If you were to see the Marines in their Dress Blues do a flag ceremony (raising the colors, presenting of the colors, etc.) you would agree that it is ritual which shows reverence.

With all due respect to the Marines and others in uniform and who are serving and have served (which btw, I have seen these ceremonies and they are awesome and very moving), I do not offer prayers to them. That is the difference.

But we 21st Century Americans are not living in a culture which has a wealth of ritual, and an elaborate code of forms of honor.

Disagree. Reference the paragraph regarding the Marines. We also have 21 gun salutes, state funerals, protocols when the president shows up, etc.

However, I will not kiss the ring of the pope. Regarding this business of kneeling and praying/worshiping Mary we would to well to follow the example of Peter when Cornelius fell down to worship him and Peter told him to get up for he was just a man.

We should also look to the example of John when he fell at the feet of an angel and he was told to get up. So here are two verses from the Bible addressing how we should respond to fellow Christians and angels.

This is a pity; in this we are much poorer than many other cultures. We tend to see two ends of the spectrum --- vulgar, cheap and banal on one end, and religious adoration on the other ---- and nothing in-between. No continuum, no gradations.

When I was a child, we were taught to get to our feet if an older person came into the room. Can you believe that? We said "Yes, sir" and "Yes ma'am" and did not call adults by heir first name. But no more.

I was raised the same way. I still do these things. However, I don't pray/worship people in these cases.

But that's why anything that isn't common and banal tends to get misinterpreted as worship. Because we don't have anything near an adequate culture of legitimate, recognized "intermediate honors" for parents, grandparents, elders, teachers, judges and doctors, let alone angels and saints.

Again, the main difference here is that we don't pray to elders, judges, teachers, etc. Respect them? Yes. But no prayers, no assigning mythical aspects like the RCC does with Mary such as the immaculate conception, perpetual virginity, and all the other non-Biblical teachings regarding Mary by the RCC.

You are aware that the RCC is considering elevating Mary to co-redemtrix?

In August 1996, a Mariological Congress was held in Czestochowa, Poland, where a commission was established in response to a request of the Holy See. The congress sought the opinion of scholars present there regarding the possibility of proposing a fifth Marian dogma on Mary as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate. The commission unanimously declared that it was not opportune, voting 23-0 against the proposed dogma.

By 1998 it was doubtful the Vatican was going to consider new Marian dogmas. The papal spokesman stated "This is not under study by the Holy Father nor by any Vatican congregation or commission". A leading Mariologist stated the petition was "theologically inadequate, historically a mistake, pastorally imprudent and ecumenically unacceptable". Pope John Paul II cautioned against "all false exaggeration", his teaching and devotion to Mary has strictly been "exalting Mary as the first among believers but concentrating all faith on the Triune God and giving primacy to Christ." When asked in an interview in 2000 whether the Church would go along with the desire to solemnly define Mary as Co-redemptrix, (the then) Cardinal Ratzinger responded that,

the formula “Co-redemptrix” departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings...Everything comes from Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians, in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything she is through Him. The word “Co-redemptrix” would obscure this origin. A correct intention being expressed in the wrong way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-Redemptrix#Proposed_dogmatic_definition

Your entire argument depends on the assumption that pray = worship. But pray is not a synonym for worship. This is a false equivalence.

Think of what can be the content of a prayer, any prayer in your prayer book. It could be

praise
appreciation
thanksgiving for gifts or generosity
sorrow for wrongdoing
request for a favor
declaration of love and loyalty
recognition of being in a subordinate position
giving credit where credit is due
awe for beauty and power
plea for help
promise of fidelity

All of these are indisputable part of prayer, but it does NOT mean that whenever we express praise, appreciation, thanksgiving, sorrow, request, love, loyalty, recognition, honor, promise, etc. we are adoring the person we are addressing. After all, we express all these things --- all of them --- to our fellow human beings on some occasions, and yet we are not making idols of them.

It's a question of due measure.

Honor your father and your mother. Honor the king. Give honor to whom honor due

That honor toward a fellow creature could be quite extravagant in Biblical times, and still not be idolatry. People are bowing down to people, places, and things (to King David, to the Ark of the Covenant, to Jerusalem) and blessed for doing it. Were they idol-worshippers? No. They were using forms of respect which are Biblical, and which are NOT idolatry.

If you don't see that, you don't understand a fundamental distinction which the Bible makes dozens, maybe even hundreds of times.

Here’s where the confusion comes in. What’s forbidden is bowing in adoration; not bowing as a sign of honor or respect.

Can I show that Biblically? Sure. It permeates Old Testament culture.

I looked up “kneel(ing)” and “bow(ing)” in the good old BibleGateway Keyword Search, and found so many references it would be exhausting to list them all.

Genesis 23:7 Then Abraham rose and bowed down before the people of that land

Genesis 33:3-7 Jacob bowed down to the ground seven times as he approached his brother Esau

maidservants and their children bow down to Esau

Leah and her children bow down to Jacob

Joseph and Rachel bow. Etc. etc!

Genesis 37 Joseph’s dreams: his brothers’ sheaves of corn -— and then the sun and moon and eleven stars —— bow down to him. Later his brothers actually do bow down to him with their faces to the ground

Genesis 48:11 Joseph bows to Jacob “with his face to the earth.”

1 Kings 1:15 Bathsheba bows low (face to the ground) and kneels before the aged king David

2 Kings 1:13 the captain kneels before the prophet Elijah, and “prays” —begs-— him to spare his life and the life of his 50 men

Moses bows down to father-in-law Jethroe;

Ruth bows down to Boaz;

David prostrates before Jonathan;

David prostrates to Saul;

Abigail prostrates to David;

Saul prostrates to Samuel;

Nathan prostrates to David;

Obadiah bows to the ground before Elijah;

the prophets in Jericho bow before Elisha;

the “whole assembly” bows low and prostrates before David;

David bows to the Temple;

David prostrates to Jerusalem;

God causes the king’s adversaries to bow prostrate on the ground and “lick the dust at his feet”;

the sons of the oppressors will bow to Zion.

OK, pretty obviously the patriarchs, prophets, and kings knew about the commandment not to bow down and worship anything or anybody but God. But here they are bowing, kneeling, and prostrating, and God is not offended. Why?

Because the commandment clearly forbids bowing and worshipping a creature as the Creator; it does not forbid kneeling or bowing (to king, prophet, father, husband or brother) as a form of honor.

The commandment does not prohibit kneeling or bowing to give honor. It prohibits adoration toward anyone but Almighty God.

Now here’s an interesting episode:

1 Kings 2:19
When Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, the king stood up to meet her, bowed down to her and sat down on his throne. He had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down at his right hand.

Here’s the King bowing to his mother. Does that mean she’s equal to God? No. It doesn’t even mean she’s equal to the King. It means he’s pleased to honor her because of her royal dignity, her relationship as Queen Mother.

As our mindset gets further and further from traditional custom and culture, it gets harder and harder to grasp what was once the universal language of physical gesture (the salute, the tip of the hat, the bow, the genuflection, the handclasp, the curtsey, the kiss) and put each expression in its proper perspective.

It’s something to ponder and appreciate. As I live, I appreciate it more and more.

I think we're unBiblical because we don't do ENOUGH bowing, prostrating, and kissig.

And by the way, the titles of Mary are all--- every one of them --- derivative from her relationship to her Son. If he is Christ the King, she is the Queen Mother. That's way the relationship language of the Bible works.

Everyone --- not just Mary --- needs to be a cooperator in Redemption, a cooperation which is totally subordinate to God, which is expressed very well by Paul:

Philippians 2:12-13
"Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence, but much more now in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure."

"Co-Redemptrix" (which is not a dogma of the Church) is a term which, if it came into use, could have two different, even opposite senses: a true orthodox one, and a false heretical one.

The Orthodox one (like any Marian title, like "Blessed" -- or like the title the Angel Gabriel gave her, "Kecharitomene" ---) would be a strictly subordinate and derivative meaning: Jesus is the unique and only Redeemer, being our incarnate Lord who died for us; Mary cooperated in His Incarnation; therefore she cooperated in the Redemption. His title means He is the Redeemer; hers means only that she played a role, she was a companion from beginning to end, she was a cooperator. ("Your own heart" said Simeon the Prophet, "A sword shall pierce.")

Quite the opposite would be a presumptuous assertion that she was or is Jesus' equal. She is not co-equal. Not Deity or Goddess or anything of the sort. Just a creature, a handmaid really, who depends of God as her Savior.

I think it's because of this likelihood of confusion between a true meaning and a false meaning --- that the Church has steered clear of attributing such a title.