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.
A few years ago I asked my son in law, an outstanding opthamologist, about radial keratotomy. His answer was (paraphrase) "we don't do that for old geezers like you."
Yep, the “open the Bible and point” method of solving problems could easily find you drunk and committing incest.
Wow! I{m too tired to type today - worse then my usual low standard. Imelda, pray for HER and for the rest of us ....
Can someone answer?
I wonder how long it will take to get an answer, I pinged a bunch of people and it's been over an hour.
*****************
I can't. To be honest, in my experience, Protestantism hasn't really much of a subject of interest in the Church.
*****************
I can't. To be honest, in my experience, Protestantism hasn't really been much of a subject of interest in the Church.
Correction above.
All the Catholic writers I know write about Catholicism. I suppose there might be some stray crackpot who'd rather write a hatchet job on another religion, but I haven't encountered him.
That is my experience as well.
So, I've got a second question.
Which would ordinarily be considered the most hateful?:
A. A Protestant attacking Catholicism and suggesting that Catholics will probably go to hell if they don't leave the Church.
or
B. The Catholic who responds to these attacks by showing from both Scripture and Church teachings that what the Protestant is saying is erroneous.
Which would ordinarily be considered the most hateful?:
Catholicism, cause they...DOCTRINES OF MAN!...IDOLATRY!...NOT IN THE SCRIPTURES!...FALLIBLE MAN!...etc.
A. A Protestant attacking Catholicism and suggesting that Catholics will probably go to hell if they don't leave the Church. or
B. The Catholic who responds to these attacks by showing from both Scripture and Church teachings that what the Protestant is saying is erroneous.
**********************
By whom? Protestants? Catholics? The RM?
Unfortunately, although I believe the answer is "A", my experience here leads me to believe that not all Protestants would agree.
If I were Protestant I would be more concerned with false prophets that the Virgin Mary.
Matthew Chapter 7
"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye?
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye.
For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. . . .
More to the point, there is nothing wrong with saying the Freeper's statement is hateful. But it is out of line (and incites flame wars) to say the Freeper who made the statement is hateful.
Some of those who toss around hateful statements like grass seed also say that they are doing it out of love. And we do not know their hearts.
We can and do however determine that certain sources exist for the purpose of inciting hatred. And those sources - or sources that link to the sources - are forbidden. These include Jack Chick, Jesus-is-Lord.com, Vdare, KKK, Aryan Nations, Christian Identity, the false Jesuit Oath, the false Oath of the Knights Columbus, etc.
I hate to be obnoxious, but I bet none of those sources are Catholic.
Not yet. But it is possible there may be some breakaway Catholic sect whose “mission” is incite hatred towards the Catholic Church or others. The list is not closed.
So, my question is this, can ANYBODY give me the name of a current or recent Catholic book that indicates that mainline Protestants are possibly damned for their beliefs? Can you tell me where to buy a SINGLE book that tells Protestants that they must become Catholic to be saved from the fires of hell?
Three points:
First, most Protestant writers are not so myopic as to say Catholics are going to hell. The books I've read about Catholicism by Protestant authors are careful to simply post the Scriptures which reveal the blatant idolatry of Rome, permitting the reader to draw his own conclusions.
Further, as regards the Reformed, we believe that only God knows the heart and we are very careful not to speculate on other people's salvation. No church on earth is perfect and no one has everything right 100% of the time or else they would be God. Read the Westminster Confession of Faith...
"V. The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error;[10] and some have so degenerated, as to become no Churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan.[11] Nevertheless, there shall be always a Church on earth to worship God according to His will.[12]
Of the Church
All men are called to preach the Gospel in truth and love. Rome squirms because when that Gospel is preached Rome is shown to be in error time after time.
Secondly, there are dozens of books by writers like Scott Hahn who outline the restricted nature of salvation in Catholicism. Your own catechism at vatican.va says exactly that...
846"Outside the Church there is no salvation" How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
Seems quite exclusive.
Now the Catholic apologist will point to 847 and 848 saying the RCC gives a break to those who are "ignorant."
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
Lol. God in heaven, thank you for teaching me "the Gospel of Christ and His church" and for keeping me "ignorant" of such foul errors as "other Christs" and "co-redeemers" and the alchemy of transubstantiation and confessional mediators and "infallible" false bishops of Rome, etc.
Finally, nowhere in Protestant literature is there anything even remotely like the edicts of the Council of Trent which loudly and with great finality and clarity of purpose curse to hell all those who believe in the Biblical truth of their justification by faith alone in Christ alone and who have confidence in that fact.
No one possess the hubris of Rome. None.
A co-pilot can do what the pilot can do. But Mary can’t do what Jesus can do.
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.