Posted on 05/30/2008 10:21:34 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Some of you will remember my recent decision to become a Catholic. I suppose I should be surprised it ended getting derailed into a 'Catholic vs. Protestant' thread, but after going further into the Religion forum, I suppose it's par for the course.
There seems to be a bit of big issue concerning Mary. I wanted to share an observation of sorts.
Now...although I was formerly going by 'Sola Scriptura', my father was born and raised Catholic, so I do have some knowledge of Catholic doctrine (not enough, at any rate...so consider all observations thusly).
Mary as a 'co-redeemer', Mary as someone to intercede for us with regards to our Lord Jesus.
Now...I can definitely see how this would raise some hairs. After all, Jesus Himself said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that none come to the Father but through Him. I completely agree.
I do notice a bit of a fundamental difference in perception though. Call it a conflict of POV. Do Catholics worship Mary (as I've seen a number of Protestants proclaim), or do they rather respect and venerate her (as I've seen Catholics claim)? Note that it's one thing to regard someone with reverence; I revere President Bush as the noted leader of the free world. I revere my father. I revere Dr. O'Neil, a humorous and brilliant math teacher at my university. It's an act of respect.
But do I WORSHIP them?
No. Big difference between respecting/revering and worshiping. At least, that's how I view it.
I suppose it's also a foible to ask Mary to pray for us, on our behalf...but don't we tend to also ask other people to pray for us? Doesn't President Bush ask for people to pray for him? Don't we ask our family members to pray for us for protection while on a trip? I don't see quite a big disconnect between that and asking Mary to help pray for our wellbeing.
There is some question to the fact that she is physically dead. Though it stands to consider that she is still alive, in Heaven. Is it not common practice to not just regard our physical life, but to regard most of all our spirit, our soul? That which survives the flesh before ascending to Heaven or descending to Hell after God's judgment?
I don't think it's that big of a deal. I could change my mind after reading more in-depth, but I don't think that the Catholic Church has decreed via papal infallibility that Mary is to be placed on a higher pedestal than Jesus, or even to be His equal.
Do I think she is someone to be revered and respected? Certainly. She is the mother of Jesus, who knew Him for His entire life as a human on Earth. Given that He respected her (for He came to fulfill the old laws; including 'Honor Thy Father and Mother'), I don't think it's unnatural for other humans to do the same. I think it's somewhat presumptuous to regard it on the same level as idolatry or supplanting Jesus with another.
In a way, I guess the way Catholics treat Mary and the saints is similar to how the masses treated the Apostles following the Resurrection and Jesus's Ascension: people who are considered holy in that they have a deep connection with Jesus and His Word, His Teachings, His Message. As the Apostles spread the Good News and are remembered and revered to this day for their work, so to are the works of those sainted remembered and revered. Likewise with Mary. Are the Apostles worshiped? No. That's how it holds with Mary and the saints.
At least, that's how my initial thoughts on the subject are. I'll have to do more reading.
Sounds to me like a warning against the latest sola scriptura fads that get run up the flag pole twice a day.
You said: Sounds to me like a warning against the latest sola scriptura fads that get run up the flag pole twice a day.
But if you had a self-proclaimed individual-magisterical false interpretation of that verse it could say anything you wanted it to AND you could create your very own personal Christ to satisfy your desired world view and provide you with your own personal individual guarantee of assured salvation. Ain’t Atheistic Christianity great?!!
I’ve been told many times something like “How strange it must be to not be certain of one’s Salvation.”
To which I always reply (sometimes out loud) “How queer it must feel to pretend it IS certain.”
Atheistic Christianity supplants God with self (as all knowing God)...hence the individual is God because they dictate reality. In that scenario how would it be possible that you would not be saved?
So, nothing in the 2 letters to Timothy are relevant to us personally today?
Is it too aggressive for me to ask if you can get why sometimes I feel like my antagonists have two speeds: (1) Fast Forward; (2) Fast Reverse.
It is entirely possible for my criticism to be right about the sita-im-leben of the Epistle and for parts of the Epistle still to be relevant to all. (Making "prayers and intercessions and giving thanks for all", comes to mind, though that might be in the other one ....)
Your second quote is consistent with your contention generally but does not seem to me to work as an argument. (But isn't it amazing how every line from John just glows?)
How can you know God unless you study His word where He has chosen to reveal Himself?
I was a chaplain for a while at a home for severely handicapped kids. Few of them could read.
Before that, I was a kid in Sunday School, and Mister Page taught us as much about God and Jesus by loving us as he did by any propositions of faith he taught us.
When I was in the hospital, I had a little girl with tetralogy of Fallot: retarded, aortic stenosis, ventricular defect, and other stuff. When I met her she had had a bad open heart surgery followed by blowing the patch and several arrests and cut-downs. She was out there. She was in restraints because if she were not restrained she would (a) pull out every tube and whatnot and (b) reach into her diaper and smear poop all over everything (um, including the chaplain)(Thank God for hospital gowns, It was almost as bad as FR!).
I loved her. She got well, at least psychologically. She's one of my homies, though I haven't seen her in 33 years. What a smile on that kid! And when the second surgery worked and she went home and got plump and pink! WOW! God is great!
As I am fond of saying, Remember, 100 IQ is AVERAGE! That means, more or less that as much above 100 as you or Quix are, there's someone else that much below it. And that's before we get to dyslexia, ADHD and the rest.
And, you know, we say God is not bound by the sacraments. He can enter the heart of someone who has never received the Blessed Sacrament. And he does, a LOT!
I think He is perfectly capable of making Himself known.
I still think those who can should study the Bible.
For example: the Sitz im Leben of a counting rhyme like "eeny, meeny, miny, moe..." is a group of children deciding among themselves who will play in a game; when the children chant the song, we know that they are choosing who will play, but without knowing this context, the rhyme appears merely to be nonsense about tigers.Thanks for the ejumakayshun!
Sorry about that. I’m doing three things at the same time and sometimes I forget to proofread for civility.
“Few of them could read.”
I just had my high school reunion and they passed out our last cumulative report cards for all the courses I took. Good thing my kids are away. My high school counsellor wanted to know what trade I worked in and I told her I wasn’t smart enough to get into a trade so I went to college instead.
I think I’ll have to put a night’s sleep between your kind reply and my response.
It has begun to weary the bones to even think about such stuff.
I’d rather reply in a better frame of mind and mood.
Thanks for your kind reply.
There are several problems with your overall thesis, not the least of which is it’s built on speculation, conjecture, and an obvious attempt to salvage other problematic theses.
The errors begin with your first sentence:
“Never mind that in Christ’s earthly ministry He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15; Romans 15:8) And as far as his Apostles had any revelation, that’s what they were to continue.”
Your citation of Matthew 15 ignores Christ’s formal turning away from “Jerusalem” in Matthew 23:8, and your citation of Romans 15:8 completely cuts off the rest of the sentence which relates to the gentiles.
Your second sentence “And as far as his Apostles had any revelation, that’s what they were to continue.” builds on the errors of the first in that it ignores “The Great Commission,” and mistakes the Apostles negligence for an doctrine.
Then you go on to say “Until after the conversion of Paul, the Apostles stayed to the Jews and Samaritans in the Jewish homeland (and proselytes to Judaism).” and while that may be true it is not for lack of orders to go into all the world as you posit later.
Where you got “brought up on charges” out of “they that were of the circumcision contended with him” I have no idea, but it makes Petronski’s Pixar comment not as far-fetched as it may appear at first.
Now we start to get into the REAL heresy...you drop back to Acts 8 and claim “Yes the Twelve Apostles stayed put in the land of the Jews, because, “as the Father hath sent me,” Jesus Christ had instructed them, “SO SEND I YOU.” (John 20).”
The Scripture doesn’t give the “because.” Any explanation for that “because” is nothing but speculation on your part, and not very good speculation as already mentioned due to being post Pentecost and post Great Commission.
Next comes your assault against Matthew 16. In keeping with your heterodox interpretations you say “The church Christ was speaking of in Matthew 16, then was, and will be an Israelite church; a church for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. It was not, nor is it now a Gentile church with any perpetuity on earth as long as that Nation, Israel, is under the condemnation of blindness ...” and “There is NO church, denomination, or organization visible on Earth today that has any resemblance to the Israelite Church of Matthew chapter 16...”
Of course if that were true, then the gates of hell would have prevailed against the same Church you say Jesus was restricting his comments to prior to the resurrection.
The rest of your thesis follows the familiar conceit of speculating on what SHOULD be happening if the orthodox position were correct, noting this is NOT what is occurring, and so declaring the orthodox position erroneous.
I believe there’s enough here for a fair minded reader to see your errors even without the inherent contradiction of “divided Christ” but I invite others to comment on my analysis.
Quantity of sweat: zero. Have a good evening.
Be easy to the old self and corpse. God cherishes both.
If only they hadn't done it all in German. Of course Sitz-im-leben does sound WAY more offishul than "context" or "life situation".
Thanks for your kind words. Nice to read them.
I yam what I yam. And I do what I can with what I got.
And sometimes that overwhelmingly inadequate.
LUB
Quix lobs a slow easy one over the plate.
But what's this? Dawg takes the pitch!
When I am weak then I am strong. (And you guys wonder why we have crucifixes all over the place!)
Thanks thanks.
Okay. I understand, but for future reference you should know, among educated people, once a person claims credentials, it is not unusual to qualify where those credentials were obtained.
Someone with a degree in Engineering from MIT has much more credibility than someone with the same degree from a lesser school.
***you should have Pixar animate it. They’re producing films of all the fanciful fairy tales these days.***
They ought to begin with the OPC. Reading through their site is a fanciful work of fantasy. The smugness is very enlightening. Reminds me of the parasites and geeks that were on the student council in high school.
More Calvinist than Calvin himself.
***However, I assume that you realize that Augustine was a kosher RC except when he wasn’t. And that he wasn’t whenever the White Hankys blew left but he was when they blew right. OR was it the other way around. I never keep all these rubber dogmas straight. ***
Kinda like keeping all the millions of thoughts of the Protestants straight? Tell you what. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02084a.htm gives a pretty good account of his life. I’ll bet that you after reading this, could keep the truth straight.
***But the effort afoot is to paint alter Christus (or alter cristus according to one protestant “scholar”) as if Catholicism makes of each priest a fresh new Messiah...as though we are taught there are half a million Sons of God walking the earth.
It’s a smear, motivated by hate.***
We are called to be an imitator of Christ, except for the elite. We are called to do the will of the Father, except for the elite. We are Judged by the Lord God Almight, except for the elite.
Ya know, we oughta join the elite.
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.