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.
We were discussing the honorific “Queen” applied to Mary. You were (not entirely without merit) faulting me for my “no indication” comment, but I am responding by noting that even if I accept your premise about the two passages and read them in the most positive (to your position) light, they still lend no credence to the use of the honorific “Queen” for Mary.
In fact, I see little reason to accept that Revelation has anything to do with Mary. Without getting into details, I note that if we try to showhorn Mary into the passage (because the woman gives birth to a son), I would note the son she gives birth to is immediately taken to heaven, and the passage later speaks of the woman’s other offspring.
Some interpret the woman as indicating the completion of the gestation period of the end days (42 months), and her 1260 days in seclusion as the 2nd 42 months of the 7-year tribulation.
I’m agnostic on the various tribulation scenarios.
THe Revelations passage and it’s interpretation as being indicative of Mary is what I was refering to with others earlier when I noted how easy it was to form scripture to a worldview if you grant a human the right to pick and choose what parts to interpret in what way.
People may misinterpret our great love for our wonderfull spiritual mother, I almost understand that. They don't realize that love is infinite. The more we love, the more we love God. Insulting God's children is, to me, the enemy's influence.
All matters of faith are dubious. We just have different criteria and information as to what we accept as believable. I am often very amused when people of faith attack other believers so vehemently. In essence, it is one lunatic calling another lunatic a lunatic. A neverending source of mirth for me.
Yes, when I refused, he said we had nothing more to discuss, so we left.
That was my first, “almost a Christian church member” experience, and the last until I became Catholic, over a decade later.
That's a very good question. Since Rome considers "the rock" of Scripture to be Peter and not the Triune God, it would be interesting to see the nomenclature for Mary and any Scriptural support for it.
On this thread, PADRE PIO AND THE MOTHER CO-REDEMPTRIX, we find names such as "co-redemptrix" and "dispensatrix of all graces" and "mother of universal reconciliation" and "Queen of Martyrs" and "Mother Coredemptrix who immolates herself with the Son on the Cross in order to bring to pass the universal Redemption."
In fact, as this thread tells us, the RCC considers Mary's suffering as "her immense coredemptive suffering." Somehow Christ's suffering the indignity of the cross must be augmented by Mary's "suffering" in order for men's redemption to occur.
Further, the link tells us "and she (Mary) is seen walking along the way to Calvary "immediately behind Jesus... burdened with her own cross" (11). A cross for Jesus, a cross for Mary."
Are men saved by Mary carrying our sins, or by Christ alone shouldering the burden?
Does Mary pay for our sins or is Christ the only ransom equal to the debt?
Are men judged righteous by God because Mary covered our sins or because we are acquitted of our sins by Christ's atonement alone?
Did Mary pay the terrible price for our sins or were we bought by the sacrifice of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world?
"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." -- 2 Peter 2:1
Mary bought no one. Mary, like all believers, was bought by God for His glory by the blood of Jesus Christ from before the foundation of the world.
ping to 365
Any attempt to attribute to Mary and saints the ability to intercede for billions of potential requests from the nearly billion members of the Church who believe such things, cannot be done so without also attributing to them the power of omnipresence which is possessed by God alone.May I point out a logical error?
VERY powerful is not the same as ALL powerful.
Further, for a very long time we have said that being with God means no longer being bound by time and space in the manner that we currently experience those. So the question of "How does she handle all those prayers at once?" doesn't arise for us because the "at once" part has lost its power.
No magic required. Just two seconds of thought. Either God is bound by time or He is outside of it. Which say you?
Absolutely astounding. Is that what the RCC teaches you?
Dubious: "causing doubt; ambiguous; vague; skeptical; with the outcome undecided; arousing suspicioun; shady."
Which of those defintions fits your Christian faith, LB? Thank God, none of them apply to mine. I know whom I have believed.
Well, the all important way is that whatever "powers" Mary and the saints may enjoy and however we want to think of them, they are all by God's gift and not intrinsic to the saints. That's the critical ontological difference.
And bearing in mind that "more" is not equivalent to "all", all we say about the saints is that they hear the prayers of those who pray to them for their intercession. We don't claim that they are out organizing and running the muons and quarks and whatnot beyond Betelgeuse. But God sure is.
In general, if anyone thinks what we say of Mary is giving her divine qualities, I'd suggest that maybe his concept of God needs expanding.
You are truly enlightened. Thank you
Jefferson Memorial, Lincoln memorial, Washington Monument(s), Grant's Tomb, Teddy Roosevelt's Grave and Sagamore Hill, Mount Rushmore ...
Baba is “Woman” in Polish. Many Polish and Slovak Mothers or Grandmothers are called Baba.
I could post Hebrews 11 for them
That thread tells you? The Catholic Church does not consider that so, not yet. Your thread might, but not the Catholic Church.
Somehow Christ's suffering the indignity of the cross must be augmented by Mary's "suffering" in order for men's redemption to occur.
Not even your thread says that.
The Catholic Church says Christ.
The Catholic Church says No.
The Catholic Church says it was Christ.
From that thread.....
To: stfassisi
I hope the record is adequately clear here: None of this involves referring to Mary as “Redemptrix.” Claims to the contrary are false.
34 posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 12:52:46 PM by Petronski (Cleveland Indians: Pennant -14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
This is Catholic teaching.
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.