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.
I can’t believe we found something on which we agree. Progress!
“Installed” as Pope?
Peter was made Pope by Christ.
You wrote:
“Read the link. Those were just the first seven of 21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not part of the inspired word of God.”
I know they were the first seven. You posted them and I showed they were not valid. What more needs to be said?
Excellent.
Of course, we realize that NOTHING—certainly not facts—trump the political RELIGIOUS power mongering committees of the RC edifice.
. . . unless, perhaps . . . it’s an apparition of a white hanky.
God bless you, sister.
***Sorry, He’s in my heart, not my hatstand. LOL. How foolish...***
I agree. Creating one’s own personal God in one’s own image is very foolish.
And the same to you, brother.
I was talking about your analogy of what we believe. THAT is foolish.
More understandable this time around.
And slightly less alarming in me FOR YOU.
Rushing along. Maybe I’ll think of another response when I get back.
The pots beckon. Mugs for students, actually. Of course with oblique personal mark ‘propaganda’ wink wink, on the bottom.
You know, that dastardly horrifically subversive motto . . .
“FAITH, HOPE, LOVE, JOY” around a modified NM sun thingy.
PEACE,
Ahhhh . . . so nice to see quotes of my words in something besides an epithet. LOL.
Ahhhh . . . so nice to see [correction] a paraphrase of my words in something besides an epithet. LOL.
MAT 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.
[7] ROM 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory. EPH 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. PRO 16:4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
[8] 2TI 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. JOH 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.
[9] EPH 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: 11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own wilL. ROM 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. 2TI 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. 1TH 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus ChrisT.
[10] ROM 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. EPH 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love. 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself.[6] 1TI 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.
Frankly, any time I see a list as long as that whether a list of "proofs" published by "Catholic Answers" that Peter was the first Pope or this list I am immediately skeptical and can be certain there are distortions and misstatements in the list.
Of course, that doesn't mean the entire list is incorrect. Perhaps you would care to refute it point by point. Or, do you believe the entire list is worthless because there are demonstrable untruths contained in it? Are you one "twits" who believes in the "Unbroken Line of Popes? If so, please name the Pope, and a little history of that Pope, who reigned between 304 and 308.
LOL
Cauvin was a sick man, and he created in his own image a sick god.
You wrote:
“Rereading your post shows the paltry arrogance of the RCC position. It’s laughable.”
I can just tell you’re really going to stick your foot in your mouth in this post.
“LOL. God COULD inspire in Pig Latin, but He didn’t. I’ll stick with the Jewish canon as the Jews received and delivered it; not with Rome’s rewrite centuries later by way of the Greeks.”
God inspired men in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. All Christians agree on that point - all of them. All the books, and all the verses, in a Catholic Bible fall into those three languages. You’re simply not making a point. Unless you can produce some sort of evidence that God only works with Hebrew and Aramaic (which would deny the inspiration of the New Testament) then you’re out of luck.
“The New Testament does not attest to the authorship of God?”
Is that what I wrote to you? No. But since you can’t deal with what I wrote you must invent a straw man. Here is what I ACTUALLY WROTE TO YOU: “Irrelevant. Neither do most of the authors of the New Testament or the Old Testament.”
What I said is 100%, undeniably true. MOST of the New Testament authors do not make claims to inspiration. Where does Matthew claim his gospel was inspired? Where does Matthew even claim to be the author?
“No wonder the RCC ignores so much of the Bible.”
I am ignoring nothing in the Bible. Clearly I pay more attention than you do because I know Matthew never claimed inspiration.
2 Tiomothy 3:15-17 says all scripture is inspired. It doesn’t what books are inspired.
Now now!
There ya go agin trying to confused the confuzzed with facts.
Tsk Tsk.
/s
What did the capital city of Italy rewrite centuries later by way of the Greeks?
St. Jerome included the Deuterocanonicals in the Vulgate late in the fourth century, because he was instructed to translate the Bible as it existed at the time.
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.