Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Worship of Mary? (An Observation)

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.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; mary; rcc; romancatholic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 5,241-5,2605,261-5,2805,281-5,300 ... 11,821-11,826 next last
To: John Leland 1789; sandyeggo

Oh, not again. I have personally refuted this list way toooooo many times!

The earliest version of such a list I know of is on page 210 (unpaginated page actually) in Zacchello’s Secrets of Romanism, 1948 [1958]. I actually have a collection of anti-Catholic books including Zacchello’s. This list has several incarnations and has been refuted hundreds of times online. Here are just a few examples of errors:

“1. Prayer for the dead and the sign of the cross. 310 AD.”

This shows up in Zacchello’s list as “Prayers for the dead. 300”

In any case, both lists are wrong. Prayers for the dead date back to BEFORE Christ as PROVEN by the second book of Maccabees 12. Also, the mindless twit, whoever he was, who compiled this list apparently never heard of the tombstone of The tomb of Abercius of Hieropolis in Phrygia from well before the year 300 which reads, “Let every friend who observes this pray for me.”

But why let Jewish and Christian scripture and Christian archeology get in the way of a good smear against Christ’s Church, right?

“4. The mass adopted as a daily celebration. 394 AD”

Huh? Anyone ever read Acts 2:46? And St. Cyprian mentions daily communion and he was dead almost a century and a half BEFORE 394.

“5. The worship of Mary and use of the term “mother of god”, originated at the council of Ephesus. 431 AD”

No worship of Mary, and the term Theotokos was already used in the third century by Dionysios of Alexandria in a letter around 250.

“6. Priests began dressing differently than the laity. 500 AD”

You mean priests never dressed differently in the Old Testament? Sheesh!

“8. The Latin language to be used for worship and prayer in church imposed by Pope Gregory I. 600 AD”

Fascinating. Zacchello says “Worship in Latin Language 600” Notice that now the list says “church imposed”? Imposed on whom exactly? Was anyone in the Western world offering Mass in any other language than Latin in the Catholic Church in 600? And on whom did Gregory “impose” this exactly?

Anyway, you get the idea. The list is bogus. It is filled with errors and distortions and quite frankly is only believed in by twits who know so little about history or the use of BOOKS that they are easily fooled into believing this claptrap.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Catholic_Inventions.asp

http://www.catholic.com/library/More_Catholic_Inventions.asp

the list destroyed!: http://hometown.aol.com/philvaz/articles/num4.htm

and again, destroyed here: http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/traditions.html


5,261 posted on 06/12/2008 8:06:33 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5113 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Good points.


5,262 posted on 06/12/2008 8:40:42 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5260 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

I had to go back and look at some of the posts and I cracked up when I saw the long list of “new innovations” of the Catholic Church.

It was on a real nice anti-Catholic site that was just interested in saving a few souls, ya know. Ah’m mahty glad they care about muh soul soooo much!

What is hilarious, besides all the lies and half-truths on the list, this is by people whose religion is no older than about 400 yrs and some of them are as new as a week or two. Does that not make you laugh at the absurdity!?!


5,263 posted on 06/12/2008 8:41:34 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5167 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

I made this challenge to one poster but she wouldn’t take me up on it:

Read John 6 and tell me why those disciples walked away from Christ at that time.

I’ve heard all their explanations that don’t work about remembrance and all that, but I would like them to tackle that specifically.

I’m not holding my breath.


5,264 posted on 06/12/2008 8:56:31 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5238 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

Well, since I was raised a Protestant, I was allowed, LOL. I have 2 KJVs with my name on them and I have my blessed RSV, which is so worn out, I’ve taped it up so many times and then I have to tape it again.

I do have a Catholic Bible but for my regular use, I still use my RSV.


5,265 posted on 06/12/2008 9:00:36 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5246 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary

In the earlier section [of Acts], the “witnessing” of the Twelve, as recorded from 2:5 to the end of chap. 12, was to “Jews and proselytes” (2:10) alone; “unto you (Jews) first (3:26), &c. Their subject was that Jesus (”the Nazarene”) is the Messiah; cp. 2:31, 36; 3:18, 20; 4:10, 26; 5:42; 8:5, 37 (see Note); 9:20, 22.

At Damascus, after his “Conversion”, Saul (Paul) “preached (Gr. kerusso) Jesus in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God”, and proved “that this is very Christ”, i.e. Jesus as the Messiah. There was no proclamation to Gentiles as such (see 11:3). The preaching of the Word was to the Jews only (11:9), f5a and to the Gentile proselytes, that the crucified “Nazarene”, Jesus, was in truth the Messiah (see Note on 10:48). The duration of this witnessing was about 15 years.

The second part of “Acts” records the apostleship of Paul, and his “witnessing”, which was to Jews and Gentiles alike. He was the “chosen vessel” separated by the Holy Spirit “to bear My Name before Gentiles and Kings, and sons of Israel” (huion te Israel, 9:15). His subject was “Jesus and the resurrection” (17:18). Not, be it marked, Jesus as Messiah, but Jesus (Saviour-God), raised from among the dead, and made the federal head of a new race of beings by resurrection, as announced in Ps 2:7, with which comp. 13:32-39.

This “witnessing” lasted the 15-16 years (see 3 above) of the labors of Paul and those associated with him till the imprisonment in A. D. 61. And to the Jew was given priority of hearing the message (13:5, 14, 42, 43; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 7, 19, 26; 19:8).

Throughout the whole period of the “Acts”, the witnessing was accompanied by the miraculous gifts promised (Mark 16:17, 18). Cp. 3:7, 8; 5:5, 10, 15, 16; 6:8; 19:6, 12; 20:9-12; 28:3-6, 8, 9. At the close these gifts ceased, as is plain from the significance of Phil. 2:26 (A. D. 62); 1Tim. 5:23 (A. D. 67); 2Tim. 4:20 (A. D. 68). See Ap. 180. Thenceforward, the privilege of proclaiming and “witnessing” (Isa. 48:10; 44:8, &c) was taken from the Jew, and “the salvation of God” (see Note on Isa. 49.6) was “sent to the Gentiles” (28:28). The proclamation is now by witnesses taken out from among “all the Gentiles upon whom My Name is called” (15:17), including of course the Jewish members of “the body”.

Having now before us all the “sequence of fact” (cp. also the Structure, p. 1575, and Ap. 180), we can trace “the progress of doctrine”, the development of dispensational teaching in Acts, as well as in the complementary “Church” Epistles of Paul, and the limitations of the strictly Hebrew Epistles. Our Lord’s words in John 16:12, 13, are precious, and they are precise (see Note in loc.).

The Gospels record what the Lord “began to do and teach” (1:1); after His resurrection He continued “speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom” (Ap. 112); and after His Ascension the teaching is carried on by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the truth (John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26), Who was to guide (lead on) into “all the truth” (see Notes, John 16.12,13).

During the “Acts” period, believers were guided into much truth, truth in advance of what had previously been revealed. They were instructed in much that they had been unable “to bear” before the coming of the Holy Spirit to instruct them. But not even yet had they been guided into “all the truth”. This was reserved, and not permitted to be revealed, until the public proclaiming of “the kingdom” had ended, after the close of the “Acts”. (see Notes on the Epp., specially Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians.)

Then it was, at the commencement of this present interim period during which “blindness in part is happened to Israel” (Rom. 11:25), that “the church which is His body” (Eph. 1:22, 23) began to be formed “to the praise of the glory of His grace” (Eph. 1:6, and Note on 15:14). As above stated, and as the facts show, this church did not begin at Pentecost as is so commonly taught and believed.

_________________________________________
I thought you would appreciate these comments from the Companion Bible, Appendix No. 181


5,266 posted on 06/12/2008 9:08:06 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5189 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Thanks for the links.

See there really are useful idiots in the world. I didn’t know about the list before and now I will study your links and use my intellect and reasoning to compare and contrast and I will learn more about my faith.


5,267 posted on 06/12/2008 9:08:30 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5261 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Oops, I really shouldn’t have said idiots. Let me rephrase. Malicious ignorance can be useful.


5,268 posted on 06/12/2008 9:11:26 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5261 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

1. I don’t consider the Roman Edifice “Christ’s Church” any MORE than I consider The First Baptist of Hootenholler “Christ’s Church.”

2. Methinks there’s a lot of slippin N sliden about the list.

3. Macabee’s prayers for the dead justifies the RC edifice’s? LOL! ROTFLOL! GTTM! What other Pre-Christian stuff is going to be used to justify all manner of silliness on the part of the political RELIGIOUS power-mongering committees in Rome?


Confession time for me . . . I’ve been privately taken to task by a dear sister who rightly enough shredded me up one side and down the other for my flipant catty mention of XX and XY impoverishments of Parochial educationi as I was tweaking back some tweaky RC posts . . . The dear sister noted that men also make estrogen etc. etc. etc.

She’s right enough I’ll just say I’m sorry for using overblown/wrong biology to justfy being catty, flipant and tweaky.

I repent and will endeavor to be more kosher next time . . . at least about the facts!


5,269 posted on 06/12/2008 9:54:52 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5261 | View Replies]

To: tiki

That’s OK.

We already know what some of y’all think of us.


5,270 posted on 06/12/2008 9:57:26 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5268 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
Marysecretary, maybe you can help.

The Catholic Church:

Is its priesthood Mosaic and Aaronic?
Is it's priesthood and dogmas from the apostate Maccabean period?

Have you read in some of these posts these implications?

Is the Catholic Church a New Testament church?

5,271 posted on 06/12/2008 10:05:04 PM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5189 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
[***I am not judging anything, I asked a simple question to make a judgement on yourself. ***]

You composed quite a few posts Judging me. Have you repented?

Are you saved?

5,272 posted on 06/12/2008 10:17:14 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Christus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5192 | View Replies]

To: tiki; Marysecretary
Do I throw away 2000 yrs of Tradition and theology on your word?

One can picture a Pharisee questioning Christ in exactly this fashion... And I find the RCC reliance on such to be equally as tiresome. (it's less than 1600 years, btw)

One can also hear tones of what was spoken to Copernicus and Galileo as well...

5,273 posted on 06/12/2008 10:20:48 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Globalism is just Socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5066 | View Replies]

Comment #5,274 Removed by Moderator

Comment #5,275 Removed by Moderator

To: Quix

Ah, yes, you would think it was all about you. I was talking about the site but if you think it is you...I guess you’re quite welcome to the title but just know that you took it, I didn’t give it to you.


5,276 posted on 06/12/2008 10:27:56 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5270 | View Replies]

To: tiki

OK.

LOL.

Yeah, I have to have a pretty motivating reason to track stuff back through several posts.


5,277 posted on 06/12/2008 10:31:06 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5276 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
***Actually, ftD rather pointedly judged the condition of my soul and repeated himself over a number of posts on another thread. If you reject the grace of God and follow instead, the faith/works gospel of the RCC or anyone else, you are not saved. (Gal.1:8-9) There is only one true Gospel (Eph.2:8-9)*** Point the 1st: You repeatedly stated in rather contentious prose that you KNEW the state of my soul and that you KNEW that I’d go to hell. Point the 2nd: You repeatedly state that you follow the gospel of misunderstood Paul rather than the Gospel of Jesus.

And if you reject the grace of God, as you state you have, you are (according to the Gospel I believe) going to Hell.

What is so complicated about that?

That is what the word of God says (Jn.3:36)

Two different Gospels, only one is right, choose the wrong one and end up damned.

Why this should upset anyone is baffling.

If you believe your Church has the true Gospel (faith plus works) you shouldn't be upset about anything I say about your eternal state, I am not upset about anything you say about mine!

5,278 posted on 06/12/2008 10:38:19 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Christus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5184 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
That’s right. We CAN know and when se say we do, they accuse us of being ‘arrogant.’ Confident is more like it. I KNOW I have been saved. I don’t have to wait until they close my casket to wonder if I’ve made it. By the Blood of Jesus, I AM SAVED. By the Grace of Jesus, I AM SAVED. And it brings me much joy to know that when my earthly body is done, I will see Him face to face.

Amen!

Ofcourse, you now have the dreaded Trent anathema on you for stating have confidence in your eternal future based on the saving work of Christ!

But I would rather be cursed by the Council of Trent for believing the truth, than cursed by the word of God for teaching a false Gospel (Gal.1)

5,279 posted on 06/12/2008 10:42:27 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Christus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5181 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
A-A-A-A-A-AMEN!!! Preach it broth-a!

Amen sister!

We might get a revival going here!

LOL!

5,280 posted on 06/12/2008 10:43:33 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Christus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 5,241-5,2605,261-5,2805,281-5,300 ... 11,821-11,826 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson