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.
Neither do we.
Nor do we put half our boat in the care of political elite RELIGIOUS power-mongers meeting in committee and wholesale influenced by the political winds of the time as 1600 years of history demonstrate is the norm for the RC edifice.
Sounds good.
***Even though it is not in most English translations, many act as if it were there.
I’m not asking for “most”, I’m asking for the one official Lutheran Bible.***
I see. When I said that Luther added text to the Bible, you asked me for a Lutheran Bible.
I gave you the text from Luther’s Bible instead. Why would you ask for a Lutheran Bible instead of Luther’s Bible?
NO GROUP . . .
NO PARTICULAR CHRISTIAN CLUB . . .
NO CHRISTIAN DENOMINATION . . .
NO CHURCH . . .
NO CONGREGATION . . .
has a monopoly on those problems nor on freedom from them.
What kind of silliness is this?
***Are you saying that it is untrue?
I’m saying you posted a screed. Proof?***
Yes I would like proof. Bolsec and Beza both knew Calvin for many years. Bolsec wrote about the nasty things in Calvin’s life and Beza wrote only nice things.
Proof that Bolsec wrote a screed would be very much appreciated.
This is not a general statement about the entire world.
= = =
Please prove it Scripturally.
I think that notion, personally, is utter hogwash.
Far be it from me to discourage one from any wisdom from The Lord.
Good choice!
Catholics don't do that either.
Two who believe in global warming are Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. I don’t believe that either of them worship Mary. Therefore the lists are not coincidental.
Millions? There are millions right here in the US, according to the pollsters, who believe in global warming. Some polls put it in the 40% to 50% belief rate, which would run it at well over 100 million here.
I have seen no polls or other data which indicate that Mary worship exists other than in isolated incidents; the Church excommunicates Mariolaters.
For the sake of His sorroful Passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.
Even bad examples are instructive.
I pray for forgiveness for the sharpness of my tongue and the grace to live Christ daily...
***Neither do we.
Nor do we put half our boat in the care of political elite RELIGIOUS power-mongers meeting in committee and wholesale influenced by the political winds of the time as 1600 years of history demonstrate is the norm for the RC edifice.***
Well good, but you guys sure don’t demonstrate that with your tens of thousands of denominations and congregations and esoteric beliefs.
We put our belief in the institution that Jesus Christ set up. St. Augustine is quoted in my tagline, by the way.
***This is not a general statement about the entire world.
= = =
Please prove it Scripturally.
I think that notion, personally, is utter hogwash.***
That’s the beauty of personal interpretation.
Okay. John 13:
1
1 2 3 Before the feast of Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to pass from this world to the Father. He loved his own in the world and he loved them to the end.
2
The devil had already induced 4 Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot, to hand him over. So, during supper,
3
fully aware that the Father had put everything into his power and that he had come from God and was returning to God,
4
he rose from supper and took off his outer garments. He took a towel and tied it around his waist.
5
5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and dry them with the towel around his waist.
He is at supper with his disciples and doesn’t leave the room (and there is no record of anyone entering) until the beginning of Chapter 18. He looks specifically at the disciples and instructs them. Specifically them.
Tight, Mark. Very tight.
NEITHER DOES THE RC EDIFICE--AND CERTAINLY NOT A SINGLE CONGREGATION WITHIN THE EDIFICE! LOL.
I find the implications of that statement to be horrendously deceptive and dripping with brazen balderdash. . . . or perhaps towers of willful INSTITUTIONAL blindness.
What a shocking thing to say. INCREDIBLE! I guess the INSTITUTIONAL, TERMINAL RC EDIFICE DOUBLE STANDARD is just tooooooooooooooooooooooooooo impossible to free one's self from. Absolutely incredible.
The Church has been doing things the same way for two thousand years. He told us what to do and we've been doing it ever since.
This more brazenly preposterous than the last one.
1. The RC edifice as such has been doing whatever for only about 1600 years.
2. It has FAR FROM DONE ANYTHING REMOTELY consistent and homogeneous over those 1600 years with some infallible Popes even being horrifically immoral and ruthless as well as blood thirsty and murderous.
3. Various dogmas, beliefs, practices have ebbed and flowed and been added to here and there--some in nuances here and there and some with major sea changes, additions, revisions etc.
This whole farce of a contention is so false on the face of it to anyone with a gram's worth of authentic history as to be laughable--hideously and embarrassingly laughable. It's actually sad and pitiful that anyone in this modern age could believe such a fallacy, much less call it any brand or flavor of true and much, much, much less any flavor or brand of Christian truth. Shocking. Absolutely shocking. I have to keep consciously forcing my gaping shocked jaw to close.
Absolutely incredible. I'm sorry, group. I care about y'all a lot--it's quite a trip dialoguing with you. But this is just sooooooo brazenly shocking. I can't say anything milder and be remotely truthful nor remotely true to authentic history--not to mention the Bible.
Do you still beat your wife? (And are you a lawyer, perchance?)
That’s sure a sticky wicket.
As an Armenian, I certainly believe one can walk away from God. I don’t think it’s as easy as some would postulate. Nor do I think it’s as impossible as the Calvinists insist. I think Paul was clear ENOUGH on it to give anyone thinking otherwsie some pause if they carefully consider his words.
And none of us do the ‘Christian walk’ perfectly.
Though some have better attitudes of heart than others . . . and I suspect that when all is said and done post Salvation and basically accepting Christ’s Blood, Baptism etc., God looks at a repentent heart, a broken and contrite heart before Him as well as earnest effort at walking the talk . . . and that’s the bottom line for Him.
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.