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.
Which is exactly what we've seen in this discussion.
Bob and weave, waiting for a TKO that never comes.
Hmmmm. Distinction with no difference.
I guess that's as close to a concession as you're capable of giving.
The verse says, All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:The the man of God may be perfect thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Then how can you use that verse to require anything but the OT?
I don't. The same thing that was required for salvation in the OT is the same thing that is required in the NT. A person can be declared righteous by believing just what the OT teaches...Trust God. That's it.
Becky
Because I know Scripture doesn't say that: you did.
Furthermore, I see nothing funny about misrepresenting what the Scriptures say.
Thank you Quix:)
Becky
I didn’t know logic was at work here at all.
You make a bunch of false claims about Catholics and a fellow poster pats you on the back for your observations.
There’s no logic at work in that.
I have no derision for God's Holy Word: only those who twist and pervert it with unbiblical doctrines of man like sola scriptura.
Agreed. Just as Mary is dead.
The current pope may try to diminish the title of "co-redeemer" for the moment. But that hasn't stopped Catholics on this forum from saying Mary is on the cross with Christ and helping Him to save His sheep.
Likewise, the RCC catechism is thankfully written in black and white, and therefore illustrates (until the next revision is published) the clear-cut errors of Rome.
And the words of the RCC catechism regarding Mary are blashpemy.
969 Taken up to heaven she (Mary) did not lay aside this saving office but by ther manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.
Read your Bible! Mary does not occupy the office of salvation; she's dead and therefore she does not intercede on anyone's behalf; and she does NOT bring anyone "the gifts of eternal salvation."
Salvation is a gift from God alone by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone.
Have I ever misquoted the RCC catechism in any excerpt I've offered?
No and no.
I deleted the footnote numbers.
Your purported google searches are suspect and therefore meaningless.
Prove that I misquoted the RCC catechism (keeping in mind that deleting footnote numbers is not misquoting.)
And further, how do you presume to know what I put in my google search???
You don't. You only know what you put in your google search.
This is insanity.
And "making up" the "missing instruction" is better?
Again, the RCC diminishes the strength, intent and resolve of the Holy Spirit to perform God's will.
A definite no-no.
That’s not an answer.
>>The current pope may try to diminish the title of “co-redeemer” for the moment. But that hasn’t stopped Catholics on this forum from saying Mary is on the cross with Christ and helping Him to save His sheep.<<
Well now you have the quote to correct them. “Co-redeemer” nor “Co-redemptrix”, neither are dogma of the Catholic church.
But I do have to ask, where did you cut and paste that quote from? The one that starts with 969?
Oh wait! A learned Catholic did say the following in response to my posting of the "infallible" Unam Sanctum where Pope Boniface VIII declared "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
"Yes. It is correct. To be in heaven is to be in the Church. To be in the Church, is to be subject, to the extent applicable, to the Roman Pontiff."
#2769 Mad Dawg
It must be so.
You can type any excuse that you like. I refer all readers to go to the thread. “Do Protestants consider Roman Catholics Christians?” And see for yourselves.
I really love that the Protestants were so wonderful to the Catholics there. It truly showed the love amongst Christians!
Perhaps we should start calling their pastors, "head snakehandler."
unbelievable, it just gets worse and worse
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.