The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[RobbyS]

In the interst of clarity:

Another question. Are you prepared to accept, without reservation, an infallible pronouncement of the Co-Mediator/Mediatrix? (It is coming one day

The Marian dogmas are indeed "inventions" if you are willing to accept the archaic defintion of "find, finding-out, or discovery." Heck, the whole of the common law is based on such invention. The protestant principle is an "invention:" in the sense of a discovery in his followers' opinion; Something made-up in my opinion. an invention of Luther. The Immaculate Conception is something like a conflation of the teachings of the Virgin Birth, the incarnation, and of original sin. You are saying that the Church is wrong to recongize the validity of formal reasoning which draws these together? The doctrine of the co-mediator is a bit like gilding the lilly. But I have no trouble with it. It is compatible with the Church's ancient understanding of the role of Mary in the divine drama.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

I've been reading your post again, and I think I may be confused:) Please remember I am kinda slow on humor and very literal. Must be why I am an IFBB. Anyway are you being sarcastic, or joking, or what?Becky

[eastsider]

Where in the Bible is the Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate Conception?

Explicitly? Nowhere. The Marian privileges you mention saw their development after the explicit joining of the parallel concepts of Mary's perpetual virginity and the Church as Mother in the fourth century. The development of the latter concept -- Church as Mother -- is the one that we can trace historically back to its scriptural kernels, not the Marian privileges.

I would also like to know what you think about Reggie's question regarding Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix with Christ???

I believe he is referring to Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all graces, which doctrine has no formal definition. And I respectfully disagree with his contention that it will receive a formal definition.

[D-fendr]

What, no councils in the AOG? {^_^}

The tree is better than either; it's the "thing" the book is describing in its limited way, and what the council is trying to clarify and distinguish among other views.

In terms of scripture, we should remember the purpose of the scripture and the council and not lose sight of this purpose: to be of help in knowing God, not the book or council's view, by direct personal experience, more intimately. However much they help us in this is to their good.

I think there are good and valuable teachers in both camps, but they and all the books and words in the world can only take us so far, then we have take the last steps without them, and approach God without words, concepts, preconceptions, judgements, expectations or conditions. This is an individual choice, your mileage may vary. But, a map becomes less useful when confused for the destination, yes?

In Christ, we believe the Word became flesh. We sometimes try too hard to reduce the flesh into words, so we can grasp it. I think as soon as we believe we have God in our mental grasp, we can be certain what we have grasped is not God.

[al_c]

That as long as you are doing what you feel God is telling you to do you are OKay?

No ... not doing what you feel God is telling you ... doing what God IS telling you. Big difference.

[JohnnyM]

I don't know if it is of "all graces", or what exactly that means. I think it refers to her role in being a mediator and redeemer in the Christian faith. Meaning she is part of our redemption and we can pray to her as a mediator, a la Christ. These two concepts are very dangerous.

http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/coredemptrix.asp

JM

[OLD REGGIE]

The Roman pope is the bishop of Rome, who has been around since -- ta, da -- Peter. And his singular authority as the center of unity of the episcopal college has been around since Christ gave Peter his singular authority. (Does the giving of "the keys" ring a bell? : )

A later day invention. It was hundreds of years before the "Papacy" was defined. Fourth century before any Bishop of Rome claimed Primacy. Fifth century before Petrine Doctrine developed. In other words, a backwards development of history.

[OLD REGGIE]

. The most one can conclude from there having been no formal definition of these teachings at the time of Nicaea is that no one had denied those teachings at the time of Nicaea, not that they didn't exist at that time. In this latter sense, then, White is mistaken.

No one denied those teachings??? It is more accurate to say few claimed those teachings at the time of Nicaea. As I previously said; latter day inventions.

[eastsider]

I take no exception to there being only one mediator between God and man, that mediator being Christ. The Church, Mary, you and I -- we're only instruments of God's grace to a spiritually parched world, not the source.

[JohnnyM]

"I take no exception to there being only one mediator between God and man, that mediator being Christ."

Yes, but it seems the Catholic Church may adopt the doctrine of Mary as a Co-mediator, as evidenced by the link I posted. If such a doctrine came into being, would you follow it and believe it??

JM

[OLD REGGIE]

An argument from silence? Surely you can do better than that!

As a matter of fact, I could quote many early Church Fathers but I will leave it to you to show the opposite.

Surely the arguments of Perpetual Virginity and Bodily Assumption are arguments from noise. You must do better than that.

[eastsider]

It was hundreds of years before the "Papacy" was defined.

You seem to be hung up on the word pope. We have documents from the first century written by the bishop of Rome on behalf of the Church (the Letter of Clement). Was Clement called the pope? No. Was he the bishop of Rome, successor to Peter? Yes. So, everywhere you see pope used to mean the Roman pope, substitute "bishop of Rome" and you should have no problem.

[eastsider]

Surely the arguments of Perpetual Virginity and Bodily Assumption are arguments from noise. You must do better than that.

I have. Several times, in fact. Most recently at 7703, above.

[OLD REGGIE]

Do you believe the catholics reach heaven through Jesus Christ?

If you promise not to beat me I'll tell you I believe that the Catholics who accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior will certainly reach heaven. I'll go further and say that those innocent Catholics who worship Mary and/or the Saints will also reach heaven. For those, I would excuse their "invincible ignorance" and accept their good intentions.

[eastsider]

A later day invention. It was hundreds of years before the "Papacy" was defined. Fourth century before any Bishop of Rome claimed Primacy. Fifth century before Petrine Doctrine developed. In other words, a backwards development of history.

No, sir, a forward development. Just like deacons and presbyters. And a development in place by the end of the apostolic age, as evidenced by Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, ca. 95 A.D.

[RobbyS]

No Protestant denies the Virgin Birth or the Blessedness of Mary. They just don't elevate her to an artificially higher status. Or acknowledges the higher status that Luke in particular gives her. When was the last time you heard a sermon that centers on Mary or even a really intense discussion of the first two chapters of Luke? Heck, you guys don't even celebrate Christmas unless it falls on a Sunday.

[OLD REGGIE]

I believe he is referring to Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all graces, which doctrine has no formal definition. And I respectfully disagree with his contention that it will receive a formal definition.

I say that only because I lived through the years of propaganda preceding the pronouncement of the "Bodily Assumption". I see the same tactic today. Papal Letters, Societies, Writings, just plain propaganda. I believe it is a setup. Don't forget, the RCC is patient. She is willing to play a waiting game until the time is ripe. I feel, in my bones, it is coming.

[eastsider]

Yes, but it seems the Catholic Church may adopt the doctrine of Mary as a Co-mediator, as evidenced by the link I posted. If such a doctrine came into being, would you follow it and believe it??

I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. As I said, I don't think it's going to happen (the comments on the link you graciously provided notwithstanding), but if it does, I'll be happy to look at the formal definition and explain it. And, yes, I will believe it because the Church says it is so, although I hasten to add that the formal definition will not be lifted from the site you're referring to.

[eastsider]

I feel, in my bones, it is coming.

You might be right. Time will tell.

[D-fendr]

"do any of you think it would make God happy if… I was to change my mind and become catholic?

What form of worship do you think would please God most?