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.
He was excommunicated because he was a heretic. Sola scriptura and sola fide are false and heresy.
Of COURSE Christ would hear our prayers, whether or not we asked for Mary’s intercession.
During an ordinary mass, the only time you will hear Mary’s name is in the Creed, or maybe in the scripture reading. The prayers are to God the Father, Christ the Risen Son, and the Holy Spirit.
It amazes me that protestants keep asking the same questions over and over and over.
Drop the presumption of good faith and the amazement dissolves away.
Does Mary fill that role?
A protestant fantasy, that bears no relation to reality.
“Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and innocent as doves.”
The Protestant Reformation began because a multitude of other members of the Church (teachers of the Church, mind you - other monks, priests, theologians, etc) agreed with Luther's arguments - he was simply expressing out loud what many of them thought privately but kept to themselves for fear of being burned at the stake. They were all heretics? They were all demonically inspired? Doesn't say much for the soundness of the Church's teaching if they couldn't defend against Luther's arguments with anything other than the stake and excommunication. Why didn't they send their best theologians to defend against his arguments? (Because they couldn't, they knew indulgences were wrong and nothing but a money making scheme, just like "buying" people out of "Purgatory").
Luther's "Hear I Stand" speech is as righteous and holy as any sermon I've ever heard. That came straight from God, and of that I have no doubt.
If you know the Pilot, then you know that the co-pilot is simply WITH the pilot, never IN PLACE OF the pilot. WITH. With. With. The other meaning of co-.
Even a blind pig finds an acorn, from time to time.
In what way can the Church re-examine and dismiss, reject or deny (or even truly modify) what it has otherwise taught for centuries without the whole house of cards crashing down?
This is the dilemma of "tradition". Anything you add to the house of cards cannot be easily, if at all, removed, modified, etc, without the whole thing crashing down. If I am wrong, explain to me how I am wrong.
Your answer speaks volumes, actually.
When my husband and I were preparing for marriage, I expressed a willingness to join his Mo Synod Lutheran church. We went to the pastor for premarital counseling, and to look into that.
The pastor said that I must be as willing to die for Martin Luther as I was for Christ. He was vey rude about it too. I could not be accepted, unless I would swear to that. We left, and never returned.
I don’t blame Lutherans for that. I blame Martin Luther. How did that get to be a Lutheran teaching? Who made him equal to Christ, in terms of a claim on my life?
Catholics are required to believe dogma, in order to be Catholic. Nothing else.
My feeling has long been that Luther was God’s judgment (and the Reformation his punishment) upon the Church for its sins.
Strip everything away from the Catholic Church, leave only the mass, and you still have the Catholic Church.
Cornerstone Christian Church, based out of Montgomery, AL.
T’was non-demoninational.
Anything is possible. When you get that in writing from God (sola scriptura?) please let me know.
On the other hand, He may merely have separated the sheep from the goats. Now here the goats are, scattered in multiple pens, each with their own interpretation of fencing, and no reliable shepherd over them all.
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.