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.
God Bless you sister. That is The Gospel.
My question is how can someone claim they believe The Gospel and say they must do other things or they won't be saved? Either it was all completed at Calvary or it wasn't.
I believe this is where the road becomes narrow. We need to have real Faith that it was completed at Calvary by our Saviour Jesus Christ.
Amen. It was ONLY Jesus and His sacrifice for us. No baptism, no Mary, no Eucharist, no Popes, only the Blood of Jesus.
I did not need to be at your Sunday service yesterday to know that His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity were not present.
We had communion. The presence of the Holy Spirit of God was extremeley present. Sorry to letcha down.
You did not have the Holy Eucharist, the Real Presence of Christ, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.
My only disappointment is that anyone settle for less.
Mary, please try to get my entire argument. I wasn’t arguing against charismatics or the charismatic movement. I was exhibiting a kind of response. What you are responding to was a kind of play-acting, and was billed as such.
I appreciate the fact that you don’t need to insult others and you bring up valid points. Catholics do NOT believe that if you do not do “other works” you will not be saved. Catholics doctrine states that, only God knows who will be saved or not. We are told to follow the commandments and be “Christlike”. Loving Christ, means serving Him. Being “Christlike”, and serving Him, means doing good deeds. Catholics have many traditional teachings, like Jews. These traditions and teachings are what help keep the church strong, just like a country’s laws keep a society in order. A specific teaching or law doesn’t encompass our faith, it is intended to support it. The Catholic church has remained intact for thousands of years, there is a reason for that.
To me it’s not less. Being filled with the Holy Spirit is all anyone could ever want, Petronski. I’m serious about that.
I can agree with that statement. The issue of doctrine and teachings, becomes important when you have millions of individuals, each with their own thinking and customs, and you are called to be One body. We are individuals to God, but he called us to build His church under one body. Our forefathers created the constitution, which has kept this country strong. I believe they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit. I believe a strong community needs laws.
I want you to understand that I have an extremely strong temptation to respond to your post thus:
Hogwash!Can you understand why? Because that's how I think I've been responded to. Repeatedly.
etc.
It has not a microgram’s of influence on MY RELATIONSHIP with God 1:1. Sooooooo, I don’t need to get the least bit emotional about it.
I think this is inconsistent with your posts in response to our expressions of what we believe, even when we take care to make those expressions as irenic as possible.
This is a huge divide.
Based on the history of the discussion, or rather the avoidance of discussion, of what the Catholic Church teaches, I do not see any current hope for discussing the Charismatic thing, especially since I wrote that not as a bid for a discussion but as an example of a kind of rhetoric.
I guess I'd like to say that when somebody says "HOGWASH!" and the rest of it to me, I am not inclined to trust him in anything (unless I was intentionally dealing our hogwash.) It strikes me as hindering the kind of trust and respect critical for a serious conversation.
Maybe the difference is that I can and mean to show respect for people who seem to me to be deeply in error, while some others are so taken up in their contempt for the error that they end up appearing awesomely rude to the person making the error. I avoid conversations with such people.
Again
It has not a microgram’s of influence on MY RELATIONSHIP with God 1:1. Sooooooo, I don’t need to get the least bit emotional about it.
There is such a disconnect in my experience from what I have seen and what this says that I cannot go further. Tell me the noonday sky is purple. It's no less credible -- in both cases because of my experience.
Imagine a man swinging his arms about violently and inviting people to come close to him. Some do, he swings his arms even more violently, and they are hit. They say, "Your behavior is painful." The man replies, "It doesn't interfere with your relationship with God; I do not intend to cause you pain. And you should thank God for the opportunity to suffer." (Catholic thought, that!)So they walk away.
And He comes after them swinging his arms!
That's what it seems like from here.
I am reluctant to contribute to turning this into another 100 or so posts about you, so I'm pretty much done. I'll just watch some more and see how it comes out. But if you think I'm going to forget the recent colorful and cartoon-enhanced post, you're mistaken. Not ONE single argument in it. I disagree with you and I know some others who disagree with you, in large letters and colors with cartoon and perseveration. Not my idea of a good time, and it didn't advance the thought a millimeter one way or the other.
Sorry.
Lots of us could play
pin the tail on the demon or the demon on the denomination . . . either way.
The RC’s don’t REALLY have a monopoly on anything . . . good or evil . . . anything REAL, substantive, eternal . . . that is.
Soooooooooo blessed to read that. Wish that were so all over.
An RC asks that question?
Fascinating.
AMEN!
We all look through the glass darkly.
imho, God doesn’t give it ALL to any one person nor to any one group—pride being the critical thing to avoid unnecessary amounts of . . .
Collecting other folks’ views through the dark glass is not an awful thing as long as it’s kept in perspective.
We don't subscribe to YOPIOS, it's a non-issue.
I hope many FREEPERS pay attention to your post and get what they can manage to get in the way of such a setup ASAP.
So, you’re saying that YOPIOS doesn’t work?
Much wise insightfulness and perceptiveness in your post.
Thanks.
Thanks.
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.