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.
Ouch!
Shudder indeed.
Do you call that hate filled rant a prayer?
Heck. Have another joint. Not sure it's good for the beer though.
I may be paranoid. But it is certain that some Protestants here post not to discuss but to upset and "drive nuts". Denial as a defense mechanism has its merits.
You should indeed shudder at how the two of you can pat each other on the back for repeating a false statement about the Catholic Church.
It's more wah, they hate me, it's a constant refrain. It's incredible really. I wonder how old they really are.
>>Both, according to the RCC.<<
Ah, ah, ah! Bearing false witness?
LOL. Thanks.
Old enough to recognize the hate at work in constantly telling proud lies about the faith of another. That ain't love, and it sure ain't indifference.
Changing the subject aGAIN?
You don’t need a question mark there.
LOL.
I think Mad Dawg is head and shoulders above me . . . he’s so methodical . . .
I shoot from the hip in a typically ramble all over the countryside fashion.
Actually, I want to take your word for it that the Co- stuff is not really a doctrine of the Catholic Church. There are many Catholics on FR and elsewhere who keep pushing the idea, though.
I posted #5 out of the six sections of the 25th chapter of the WCF because that section addressed the error being discussed which was that the RCC considers itself to be a "perfect" church.
It's not. Not by a looong shot.
I didn't post Sections 1, 2, 3, 4 or 6 because those sections were not addressing that topic.
If and when the topic becomes "Is the false bishop of Rome an antichrist," I'll be happy to make reference to the WCF.
You really appear concerned about the WCF since you seem to post it more often than I do. lol. As God wills. Keep reading it.
Thanks.
Will read it.
>>“Mary, our subordinate Redemptrix.”
“Mary, our subsidiary Redemptrix.”
“Mary, our assistant Redemptrix.”
“Mary, our joint-Redemptrix.”<<
As a Christian, does it do you any good to perpetuate this lie? I can see when no one posted a link to a dictionary with the proper definition but since it has, these words are hateful and unwarranted.
I had 20/900 in one eye (left, the good one) and 20/950 in the other. I was wearing contacts and glasses in order to see, and radial keratotomy was a miracle for me.
The doctor would only do one eye at a time, in case there was a complication I would still have some pitiful amount of useful vision.
This has beem a miracle for me. Now the only concern is, for a high myope like myself, the risk of sudden blindness from retinal detachment. So far, so good.
This was answered previously. If it was “with the Redeemer” the Latin would be “cum Redemptor”. It is not, and it is not Latin. It is some crazy made up english that doesn’t make sense, unless she is sharing some role with another goddess.
I was going to respond to this post with a cute little "I see you" graphic, so I googled "peekaboo" images...
...Big mistake ;o)
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.