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.
Yep ... I don’t know how we poor PROTESTants can get away without praying to Mary. What with all of Pauls’, Peter’s, James, MathewMarkLuke&John’s teaching us the importance of such. Shame on us.
Scriptural authority and Christian doctrine has been hashed out over the last five hundred years by thousands of Protestant scholars and every point has been hammered and forged, proven and settled upon.
RC scholarship has been controlled by a self serving oligarchy having much less interest in truth than it does in power and control. One Pope and a few cardinals having absolute control at any one time.
Its funny how free thinking people insist that the only way to live is free... but then simultaneously believe the only way to worship is in slavery to a discredited hundreds of times over human institution.
“I” get my “history” from conventional “sources” such as “books.”
Not to present “Wikipedia” as authoritative, but the following “text” gives a pretty standard “rendering” of the general “status” of the “Septuagint:”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint
“Relationship between the Septuagint and the Masoretic text
The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic text have long been discussed by scholars. The most widely accepted view today is that the original Septuagint provided a reasonably accurate record of an early Semitic textual variant, now lost, that differed from ancestors of the Masoretic text. Ancient scholars, however, did not suspect this. Early Christians—who were largely unfamiliar with Hebrew texts, and were thus only made aware of the differences through the newer Greek versions—tended to dismiss the differences as a product of uninspired translation of the Hebrew in these new versions. Following the Renaissance, a common opinion among some humanists was that the LXX translators bungled the translation from the Hebrew and that the LXX became more corrupt with time. The discovery of many fragments in the Dead Sea scrolls that agree with the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic Text proved that many of the variants in Greek were also present in early Semitic manuscripts.[12]
....
“Use of the Septuagint
“Jewish use
By the 3rd century BC, Jewry was situated primarily within the Hellenistic world. Outside of Judea, many Jews may have needed synagogue readings[14] [15] or texts for religious study[16] to be interpreted into Greek, producing a need for the LXX. Alexandria held the greatest diaspora Jewish community of the age and was also a great center of Greek letters. Alexandria is thus likely the site of LXX authorship, a notion supported by the legend of Ptolemy and the 72 scholars.[17] The Septuagint enjoyed widespread use in the Hellenistic Jewish diaspora and even in Jerusalem, which had become a rather cosmopolitan (and therefore Greek-speaking) town. Both Philo and Josephus show a reliance on the Septuagint in their citations of Jewish scripture.
Starting approximately in the 2nd century, several factors led most Jews to abandon the LXX. Christians naturally used the LXX since it was the only Greek version available to the earliest Christians; and since Christians, as a group, had rapidly become overwhelmingly gentile and, therefore, unfamiliar with Hebrew. The association of the LXX with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars.[5] Perhaps more importantly, the Greek language—and therefore the Greek Bible—declined among Jews after most of them fled from the Greek-speaking eastern Roman Empire into the Aramaic-speaking Persian Empire when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. Instead, Jews used Hebrew/Aramaic manuscripts later compiled by the Masoretes; and authoritative Aramaic translations, such as those of Onkelos and Rabbi Yonathan ben Uziel.[18]
What was perhaps most significant for the LXX, as distinct from other Greek versions, was that the LXX began to lose Jewish sanction after differences between it and contemporary Hebrew scriptures were discovered. Even Greek-speaking Jews — such as those remaining in Palestine — tended less to the LXX, preferring other Jewish versions in Greek, such as that of Aquila, which seemed to be more concordant with contemporary Hebrew texts.[5]”
If your name is first in the ping list you are the addressee. All following names are "info only" In this instance you received an "info only" copy. :)
Your Wikipedia article doesn’t begin to support your view of history.
RC scholarship has been controlled by a self serving oligarchy having much less interest in truth than it does in power and control. One Pope and a few cardinals having absolute control at any one time.
Its funny how free thinking people insist that the only way to live is free... but then simultaneously believe the only way to worship is in slavery to a discredited hundreds of times over human institution.
= =
Extremely well put, imho.
Thx.
Three simple questions:
How old is the oldest manuscript of the complete Masoretic text?
How old is the oldest manuscript of the Septuagint?
Why is that, when New Testament quotations of the Old Testament include material in which the Septuagint and the Masoretic versions differ, the Septuagint is overwhelmingly preferred (http://www.geocities.com/r_grant_jones/Rick/Septuagint/sptableNT.html)?
Reggie, it was a sincere question.
Oh thank you!!!
Cleverly designed fables and Protestant Traditions. This is just so amazingly far out of touch with the reality of the Catholic Church that it beggars the imagination.
Sometime check out Catherine of Siena, O.P. and observe her slavish attitude toward the hierarchy
In the meantime, though, I don't need to. First, I am not talking about a theory, I am talking about something I know, so it doesn't matter to me whether or not those who have shown themselves prepared to argue the toss while handing out slurs believe me or not. The relevant people know, and if they want you in their little treehouse of horrors, I'm sure they'll invite you.
But, more relevantly, the standard of proof of guilt among Protestants is "reasonable doubt of innocence". This was established on US7's last thread, the one that was closed.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Instead of acknowledging your generous statement or dealing with your assertions reasonably, I said "Hogwash," in capital letters. I "yelled" it.
Did you feel loved? Did you think you were taken seriously?
I was pretending. (I put in the "sound familiar?" as a clue that I didn't mean it.) I'm sorry, but I thought it best. The point needs to be made. You will find that St. Peter says that if called to make a defense of the faith in us we should do so with gentleness and reverence. I'd suggest that saying, "Is NOT!," would not be the best way to follow his advice. And I'd suggest further that something's being permitted by the rules does not make it morally acceptable.
The implausible claim is made that catholics are abused for the protection of the lurkers. My guess would be that most lurkers, if they are not Christians, come away from these threads thinking seriously about NEVER becoming a Christian. Most of our threads are good advertisements for Buddhism, or maybe Quakerism.
I will take this to mean that you DO NOT subscribe to Christian Trinitarian beliefs.
I have run into many of the Catholic faith those who are practicing it have the Spirit of the Lord with them.
http://www.shvoong.com/humanities/1692888-priest-claims-jesus/
This is going on everywhere. They are doing this in the name of "Christians". Who can stop it?
Father Phleger was immediately stoped, who is going to stop Rev. Wright? The lack of leadership is a real problem for non-Catholic christians.
Conservatives are drawn to Free Republic where we find many other like-minded voters and we collaborate on our activism.
But there are differences among conservatives.
For instance, whether on-thread or off-thread, it was normal for “young earth creationists” to meet and discuss their experiences and plans for responding to the “evolutionists” who also meet on-thread or off-thread. The same claims are made and rebutted seemingly without end so there is a tendency to look for the best and worst arguments, when to respond, when to ignore, etc.
No doubt the two sides in the ongoing disputes over the “war of Northern aggression” do the same. Also, the fair tax debate and so on.
Evidently the longer and deeper the dispute the more likely the posters on the opposing sides will collaborate.
And that is also true in religious debate and for the same reasons.
But I draw the line at “making it personal.” The collaboration is fine as long as it deals with the issues, the decorum, the experiences, the plans. But it is not tolerable for any side to “gang up” on another Freeper as if to try and have him banned, suspended or silenced.
And you wonder why it never made it into the Hebrew Canon?
Is this from the RC bible?
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.