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.
That Pharisee sounds like a Calvinist. I wonder if he had ELECT vanity plates on his chariot.
I ask the Holy Spirit to fill me but I don’t ask Him to pray for me. That’s not His mission. His mission is to guide and direct us, to convict us of sin. It’s Jesus who is our intercessor to the Father, NO ONE else, sandy.
Then why didn't at least one of you think to copy pope John Paul II on that memo?
JPII referred to Mary as the "co-redemptrix" on at least six (some say eight) occasions during his papacy.
I’m not reading the poster’s mind, I’m going by the evidence he has presented in these discussions. For instance when I told him that Christians have the mind of Christ, he was incredulous and accused me of Gnosticism. Every post to me denies that something is in the bible and demands that I prove it. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that he has never read it.
>>It’s not a quote, it’s a restatement of the Calvinist view of the predestination of Mary.<<
Oh I don’t think I could live with that at all.
Yikes.
LOL
As are yours.
Hmm is right! Pot calling kettle black?
There was no name-calling from me.
Reference by a pope, once or a hundred times, does not Catholic doctrine make.
You mean like telling someone they're linking to a hate site when they're not?
Yes, I’m still laughing at the bankruptcy of your position.
I’ve noticed that. Initially I was shocked beyond belief that anyone calling themselves Christian could utter such things.
Alas, when GOD ALONE is not one’s focus . . . all kinds of inordinate affections can take root.
Nice to see your name again. Joya sends greetings.
I’m sad for you, I really am.
Are you actually claiming that “You’ve never read the bible” is neither personal nor mindreading?
>>Then why didn’t at least one of you think to copy pope John Paul II on that memo?<<
Because as Marysecretary says...”He’s dead Jim.”
Hanging here in the religion forum can make one miss info. JPII is dead, Pope Benedict is very much alive and our new Pope. Here’s what he says......
“Yet when asked, in a 2000 interview by Peter Seewald contained in the book God and the World, whether the Church would go along with the desire to solemnly define Mary as Co-redemptrix, Ratzinger’s response doesn’t look good. He says that the title Co-redemptrix “departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings” (53). He also says that “for matters of faith, continuity of terminology with the language of Scripture and that of the Fathers is itself an essential element; it is improper simply to manipulate language” (54). “
********************
That may or may not be a statement of fact, but it is not an attribution of motive.
Hmm, maybe not in your bible.
2Tim. 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
IMO, this is clearly saying following the bible’s instruction is all we need to please God. I mean, what’s better then perfect?:)
Well put.
Yes, I can understand that satan likes dissension, but he also likes to block the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I accept your heartfelt apology and understand the reasoning behind it. But none of us here has the devil IN them.
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.