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.
Stop trying to stuffing words in the Pope’s mouth.
It’s beneath you.
Thanks, OR!
Thank you for your excerpt which clearly shows Ratzinger distinguishes between churches and communities. Why? Because a "community" is a group of individuals.
Christ rebuked and corrected the woman who blessed Mary by saying "Yea, rather blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it."
Another Calvinist slur, based on ignorance of Greek:
Rather (via Strong's Concordance):
G3304
μενοῦνγε
menounge
men-oon'-geh
From G3303 and G3767 and G1065; so then at least: - nay but, yea doubtless (rather, verily).
I'll paste this, from Haydock's Commentaries:
Luk 11:28 Greek: Menounge, imo vero, yes indeed. Our Saviour does not here wish to deny what the woman had said, but rather to confirm it: indeed how could he deny, as Calvin impiously maintained, that his mother was blessed? By these words, he only wishes to tell his auditors what great advantage they might obtain by attending to his words. For the blessed Virgin, as St. Augustine says, was more happy in having our Saviour in her heart and affections, than in having conceived him in her womb. (Tirinus)
Because some churches refuse to call themselves churches.
She was not sinless; she did not ascend to heaven bodily; she is not a "co-redeemer;" she does not share in performing Christ's work of redemption on the cross...
The list of corrections seems endless some days.
NOBODY has EVER claimed that she did.
You said: Read the links in 3,776 and inform yourself.
I did and for some reason you have completely misinterpreted what they say. Perhaps the misinterpretation is designed to fit a typical hatred of everything and anything Catholic.
I can’t imagine what events in your personal life would lead to that, but I pray that you are able to overcome it and come home to the Peace of Christ through the fullness of faith found in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. It is where you belong.
I'm providing them to you as fast as I can!
Is Christ the Child different from Christ the Man or Christ the Third Person of the Trinity?
Wrong.
...she did not ascend to heaven bodily...
You agree with the Catholic Church.
...she is not a "co-redeemer;"
You agree with the Catholic Church.
...she does not share in performing Christ's work of redemption on the cross...
You agree with the Catholic Church.
PETRONSKI: No.
LOLOL. Thanks for proving my point so well. Anything, even nonsense, in order not to agree with a Protestant.
As a life-long member of the Presbyterian church, am I a member of a "Protestant church?" Am I a member of a "community of believers" that does not follow Rome?
If so, would that not make me a target of Ratzinger's pronouncement, along with all other Protestants?
Or was Ratzinger criticizing the brick and mortar of the buildings we worship in, and not the believers inside those buildings?
It's almost scary how easy it is to predict the knee jerk response. Instead of just saying yes he did and that's what we think we end up with the same old stuff.
Thank God we have a Saviour and are not dependent upon being loyal to a physical church for our salvation.
In any event my very first, one word answer was No.
One more time. NO!
That is not Scriptural.
God informed Paul. God informed Noah. God informed Moses. God informed Abraham. God informed Elizabeth. God informed Mary.
I do not accept the Catholic church. I knowingly and willfully and gratefully rebuke it.
If I died in the next 10 minutes with that truth on my lips, what would happen to me?
If one considered another religion to be without defects, would one then not wish to become a member of that church?
Link?
Oh, of course it does. BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTT.
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.