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.
Is it your contention that Jesus dishonoured his mother?
Or, similarly, did Jesus actually violate Torah in John 5?
Catholics will just switch definitions of cooperate with you in order to not really face the challenge that is set before them. The new Catholic definition of "cooperate" will be "didn't fight hard enough against for it not to happen", and everything will be in harmony. It's easy to always win a debate when you switch off on definitions to dodge every challenge. Darwinists are experts on this tactic.
Of course He did--by the letter of the Law. But Jesus correctly followed the spirit of the Law by dishonoring her, as He did when He broke the Sabbath.
How was disrespecting her wishes in front of a crowd following the spirit of “honour thy father and thy mother?” What higher point would have been made by that?
Similarly, what rabbi in Talmud has ever argued that the Shammaite prohibition against healing on the Sabbath was the unianimous interpretation of the Law?
His violations of Torah must have been apparent rather than actual in order for His sacrifice to have been unspotted.
The children of Israel wanted a god they could control, so they collected all of their gold and made a calf.
RC’s want to avoid God, so they hide behind Mary’s skirt, not daring to peek out at what really happened throughout redemptive history.
I fear for their eternal destiny.
:-)
“...not daring to peek out at what really happened throughout redemptive history.”
I would argue that Catholics and the Orthdox seem to see more than some others, since they can see not only Jesus on the cross, but also the figures standing beneath the cross as well.
Right. Thanks. I didn’t think the other was correct but was tired and foggy.
or the repetitive pejoratives
= = = =
Really?
ALL my years on FR, I’ve observed RC’s relentlessly, harshly, brazenly, LOUDLY, flood Prottys with outrageously fierce repetitive perjoratives.
It will be interesting to do the tabulations on that score and compare the two sides in terms of the use of such words and phrases.
I realize, of course, that since the RC political power-mongering elitist leaders construe their little club as the supreme authority for all reality—particularly in RELIGIOUS matters . . . that they facilitate RC’s PRESUMING, that THEY AND THEY ALONE have the RIGHT to fling such all over the grossly inferior Prottys.
Thankfully, however, burning at the stake is now out of vogue.
They said “No go” even after many Catholics thought the idea of co-redemptrix would be just peachie.
= = =
How long, approximately, would you guesstimate, that it would normally take for the magisterical elite’s political process to finally grind that out as a new approved, mandatory dogma—just as it did with the other Mary dogmas—the last one mere decades ago in the modern era?
Setting aside all the epithets and derogatory language included there,
= = =
I do confess, I think some RC’s are vastly superior experts on that score.
You said: I hope you’re well. Seems like this image/slam was a lot delayed compared to usual.
Not to worry. Been a very busy work week causing me to be “locked up” in a conference room for hours on end.
I am always here in “spirit” if not fact.
I don’t know of any Prottys doing that.
And, without the truth on all sides, I don’t think removal of disension is possible.
Can you imagine the Heavenly GTTM—Guffaws To The Max
over the very idea that St Paul, St John, Moses, Enoch et al are subservient to the Chief political power-monger of the RC edifice?
LOL.
I don’t observe any hate from the Protty side.
. . . except of idolatry, blasphemy,
brazen distortions of The Bible and of history . . .
Some of us Prottys try to conform to the notion of Loving what God Loves—people
and hating what God hates . . . sin—within and without.
Yes indeed.
Seems to me the Prottys are most diligent about avoiding such.
One would hope this would quell the Catholic nay-sayers, but nothing has yet.
= = =
I think that might require that the RC naysayers would stand or sit still long enough to face the truth in mirrors and in accurate histories and Bibles.
Given the rapidly changing ‘realities’ in Alice’s Rabbit Hole School of Theology . . . standing that still that long is highly unlikely, imho.
It would be funny if it weren't so seriously corrupt.
Last week it was the Vatican astronomer saying something and a dozen Catholics jumped out to say he doesn't speak for the Vatican!
If not for the Vatican, who?!?
Next we'll be told Mickey Mouse does not speak for Disneyland and Hillary does not speak for lesbian socialists.
ITTM--INDEED TO THE MAX!
Would it make you happy if I agreed with you that all Protestants who convert to Catholicism do it for the right reasons and all Catholics who convert to Protestantism do it for flawed reasons?
= = =
NOW you GET IT, REGGIE!
It’s called
THE RC STACKED DECK OF RABBIT HOLE REALITY THEOLOGY
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.