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.
>>read about your first pope<<
Peter? Well he had his faults but Christ trusted him.
You have me confused with someone else, FRiend. You post'em and we'll talk.
Hopefully you are searching the scriptures to see if the things we say are true.
I do, and they aren't.
LOL
There is no such Catholic title to diminish.
Likewise, the RCC catechism is thankfully written in black and white...
Yet still is subjected to the grossest distortions imaginable. Here's an example: You posted.
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.
But here is the entirety of 969:
969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512
You gave no indication you had redacted the paragraph, you just pulled it out of context and posted it.
Yes, just now.
Then NAME them, be specific.
Wrong. What each of us "knows" is everything.
I "know" my faith in Christ is a gift from God. I "know" I am saved by Christ's obedience, Christ's righteousness, Christ's one-time sacrifice on the cross which paid for every one of my sins. I know Christ is the ONLY redeemer.
Like Paul, I "know whom I have believed" because God has graciously, freely, mercifully regenerated my dead heart and renewed my wandering mind to focus on Christ alone risen from the cross.
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." -- Titus 3:5-7"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
What you "know" is something else altogether.
“distractions, diversions, clutter in the picture . . .
?HELP?”
Which photographs in your collection do you value more: the carefully posed close-ups, or the candid shots which put the subject in context?
1 Cor 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
And didn't hear from you again.
Obviously it was posted from a website that heavily redacts the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Or more likely she did that herself. Look at what was redacted:
This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect.
Yep, that's the part that states Mary consented at the Annunciation...definitely impossible in the dark no-free-will Calvinist world of the OPC. Also redacted:
Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512
Notice that co-redemptrix is NOT listed. Nope, can't post that!
It really is laughable AND sad at the same time.
You do the opposite of the Father's will you are doing the work of Satan no matter what. You become an adversary to God the Father plain and simple. If my parents would want me to become an adversary against God I would tell them off. Would I be breaking a commandment? The Pharisees and Sadduccess would think so.
Great points you've made in these exchanges.
I asked yesterday and have not yet received a response, but why is it that someone who is such a devout adherent to the 16th Century invention called "sola scriptura" so frequently quoting from books other than the Bible?
False. I can't give a verse that doesn't exist, i.e. "show me where the Bible says to pray to Mary."
Other than that, I think your imagination is working overtime.
>>Wrong. What each of us “knows” is everything.<<
GREAT! Could you pass along the Powerball numbers for this week?
I’ll split it with you!
Then POST THE LINK, because to make such a blatantly outrageous claim without proof is bearing false witness.
Well maybe inadvertantly you have just proven that praying to Mary is unbiblical.
Here it is again:
>>I asked yesterday and have not yet received a response, but why is it that someone who is such a devout adherent to the 16th Century invention called “sola scriptura” so frequently quoting from books other than the Bible? <<
Hmmmm, a puzzling question.
You’re still assuming. Plain and simple.
Peter is not Mary.
It’s always interesting to notice which questions go unanswered.
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.