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.
You do some pretty profound thinking and I mean that as a sincere compliment.
I read through the bible chronologically every year and twice through the Psalms along with a book of poetry and philosophy. It has been my early morning habit for over thirty years.
You say the bible is your basis for ultimate truth. How do you know it is a trustworthy source for ultimate truth?
“What church do you belong to?”
Thank you for the warm welcome. I'm sorry for the delay in responding.
I don't mean to be rude but what difference does the church I attend or if I don't attend any church make to any discussion? What I have learned in teaching and while watching this and other threads is that labels like epithets have a damning power to isolate into ideological camps and waste what should be fruitful discussion.
Believe in what? It is a circular argument, like “proof texting”. It is similar to fides quereas intellectum. Faith in what?
It seems to me that today the concept of “church” is an anachronism. The debate cannot be resolved because the accretions to the concept by all churches are now more important than the original idea.
I was just fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to hear Dr. Adler and even though the lecture lasted more than an hour and I'm sure if I had time to spend I could call to remembrance some of the main lecture. The only thing that fixed my attention was the fact that a seemingly committed agnostic had been persuaded by reason that there was a God beyond a reasonable doubt. The caveat in his later book that I did not pick up in the question and answer period was that although one could be persuaded by the evidence of this God's noncommunicable attributes, omi- this and that, one could not know His ethical attributes, love, mercy, grace etc. by reason or logic. That he said was by revelation.
ena
There are always guides to the system. Even the metaphysical naturalist must admit that space, time, physical laws and constants are guides.
And of course there was a beginning of real space and real time and thus a beginning of physical causality itself.
Curiously, entropy in information theory (Shannon entropy) has a similar formulation to thermodynamic entropy.
Applied to molecular biology, information is the reduction of uncertainty (Shannon entropy) in a receiver (or molecular machine) in going from a before state to an after state.
That might sound like a "so what?" until one realizes that information (the action not the message) is definitive in determining between life v. non-life/death in nature. The message, DNA, survives.
The Wimmer successful experiment in bootstrapping the polio virus under laboratory conditions began with the message which was activated in a cell free juice. The Urey/Miller experiments did not have that insight and could accomplish nothing more than amino acids.
For instance, one cannot say something is random in the system when he does not know what the system "is." A series of numbers extracted from the extension of pi might appear to be random when they are in fact highly determined.
To put that in perspective, the number and type of dimensions (spatial or temporal, compactified or expanded, etc.) is both unknown and unknowable.
Rationality reason, ratio, logic implies a test of something against a more ultimate, universal criterion. Logic itself cannot provide this criterion, though it seems somehow to be in a certain sense the beneficiary and reflection of it. Otherwise, logic wouldnt work.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters. He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou [art] with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever. - Psalms 23
I have lived in different countries and traveled fairly extensively. I have NEVER seen the anti-Catholic hate or simple rhetoric that exsists in this country. For those that argue otherwise, simple google search Pope-devil, will show you. Scary people out there.
In any case, what I find amazing is that this anymosity is almost identical to that of the hate-America crowd in the world. It also ranges from benign to scary, and it is identical in so many ways.
Now perhaps it is just a case of us being judged, the way we judge? I don't know.
Of course I love this country, when I try to talk to my anti-American friends, who are usually good people otherwise. There is NOTHING I can say to make them understand. It isn't that they don't get it. It is that they don't want to get it, they have some kind of guilty pleasure from it. When I comment, for example, don't you think that your country is also imperfect? (I'm really thinking, "How can this person who lives in a corrupt banana republic, call Americans ignorant?"). They just disregard my point. I don't understand it. But for some reason, certain people, seem to enjoy, and think it is OK to bash others. Even in the name of God.
Let's pray for God's enlightenment, and mercy. May God bless this country, protect us from our enemies, and help our leaders.
*************************************
In that case, what do you call someone who, knowing that a woman is betrothed to a man, approaches her and asks for her permission to “inseminate” her ?
Rom. 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Becky
Believe in what? It is a circular argument, like proof texting. It is similar to fides quereas intellectum. Faith in what?
What you report of what Adler says is the basic Catholic line. He may have been an agnostic, but he was a pretty Aristotelian one, and it's down the middle Aristotle/Aquinas to think we can prove that there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster, aka "The Great Hoo-Hoo in the Sky", but we can't known much about Him except by His self-disclosure.
But back to your response:
Do you believe your parents love(d) you? Do you believe it is generally a good thing for parents to love their children? Do you believe your opinion about what's good or not matters? Do you believe that "matters" in that sense, refers to anything that is true or is in anyway meaningful, or is or should be meaningful to anyone else?
Do you believe that the arguments and questions rolling around inside your head bear any relationship to reality?
If you believe they do, then the implications might bear some examining.
Or not.
;-)
I’m only considering the import of his own words.
Quiet morning so far. Nice to have a little peace.
In any case, what I find amazing is that this anymosity is almost identical to that of the hate-America crowd in the world. It also ranges from benign to scary, and it is identical in so many ways.
Here is interesting source on Primary Source Documents pertaining to early American history. The Protestant influence is unmistakable.
Among them, The New England Primer is most telling. Not only for the founders but for most of our history as a country, it was the primary schoolbook and it included the Westminster Catechism. Students were required to memorize it. First published around 1690, the New England Primer has been republished as recently as 1996 for homeschoolers.
Here is the text of the 1843 edition. In particular, note the section on the "Burning of Mr. John Rogers" which says in part:
p. 25
A few days before his death, he wrote the following advice to his children:--
Abhor that arrant whore of Rome, And all her blasphemies, And drink not of her cursed cup; Obey not her decrees...
You also said:
To God be the glory!
Throw a live bird, a dead bird and a cannonball from a tower - the live bird musters itself and flies away, the dead bird and cannonball crash to the ground and both achieve entropy albeit over much different lengths of time.
Shannon entropy in living things is reduced by the successful communication of a message. The thermodynamic "tab" is paid as the molecular machine goes from a before state to an after state.
In the domain of science - because it limits itself by "methodological naturalism" - there is no known source for information in the universe.
We Christians of course know that source to be Jesus Christ, the Word of God, Logos, by Whom and for Whom all things exist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence. For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven. Colossians 1:15-20
2. Origin of life.
3. Origin of inertia.
4. Origin of information
5. Origin of conscience (sense of right v wrong, good v evil, etc.)
6. Origin of consciousness (including decision making as well as awareness)
” I was not presenting an argument, so I don’t see how what I presented could be a circular argument.”
I apologize. It would appear we were talking past each other. I was not responding to an argument, just an observation concerning the two phrases.
You've apparently just signed on to Free Republic. It's fairly standard procedure in these religious discussions for a person to offer what his religion is so that we can all better understand the debate and where each of us is coming from.
If you choose not to say what church you belong to or what faith you hold, that's your prerogative.
But don't think many of us will engage in a discussion with someone who is not honest about the questions they're asking or the positions they're putting forth. It's a waste of time. For all we know, you could be a Muslim or a scientologist or an atheist.
Are you a Roman Catholic or a Protestant? Or do you still refuse to answer that question which, to the best of my knowledge, every one of us has answered forthrightly?
FYI, I'm a Presbyterian.
Simple Google searches will bring thousands of hits. Within the past few days I posted a direct quote of a Pope and gave the Vatican.va link. One of the "non-Catholic" haters (by a "I am a victim" definition) searched the direct quote through 138,000 google hits and found hate and porn sites apparently to "prove" I searched hate sites for "dirt". It proved nothing except you'll find trash if that's what you are looking for.
For an exercise do a simple google search on Protestant-heretic, review the 213,000 hits and you'll find hatred directed towards Protestants. What does this prove? NOTHING!
Is it just possible you mistake rejection of Catholicism as hatred?
When the Jehova Witness or the polite pair of Mormon Missionaries knock on your door and you dismiss them, politely or otherwise, as a non-Christian cult is it because you hate them?
How often do you proselytize amongst strangers and aquaintances, as you do here, and are dismissed out of hand. Is it hatred? If that is in the forefront of your thought you'll find it. (My personal thoughts.)
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.