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.
Have you lost track?
Quoting something is exclusive?
No, the process of quoting means that the original statement gets duplicated. Oh boy, you’re on a roll tonight and seemingly at right angles to reality. Shall I invite our resident UFOlogist since your postings are leaning towards the science fiction.
Quix, is that you?
You wrote:
“You are truly consistent.”
That makes one of us.
“Misrepresentation is not a virtue.”
No, it isn’t so why are you doing it by creating all of these straw men?
Seriously. It is just possible that what we have here is a failure to communicate. Such failures almost always feel like the other guy's fault.
But why don't you re-state your point in language simple enough for a Catholic to understand.
(The problem with a arguing that your opponents are all fools is then they get to ask you to be patient with them because they're fools.)
LOTS
of ‘seamless, homogeneous, unbroken’ dogma is a wholesale fallacy.
Yet, when we point it out . . . we are wrong! LOL.
Requires some interesting mental gymnastics, as we are seeing.
You wrote:
“Yes, numerous times, each time with “corrections”.”
Now again you’re admitting they exist. A while ago you said:
In #5537 you wrote: “It is impossible to research what doesn’t exist. THE LIST DOESN’T EXIST!”
So, in one post you say no list exists. In another you say they do exist. Which is it?
Have you given Reggie some lessons in posting?
I disagree with any simple sense of homogeneity of doctrine and have tried to explain the disagreement with analogies and examples.
WHen I was not only not Catholic but anti-Catholic, I never heard these claims. Not hearing them, I don't get what it is we're supposed to be saying that is so foolish.
Now, now, Old Reggie.
You should know by now . . .
it is by daffynition 100% impossible for an RC edifice rep to be [whispered] w r o n g.
When it looks likely . . . all manner of past, present and future realities are matrix mangled to adjust and shoehorn in whatever new convolutions are called for.
And, then, voila—whatever fantasmagorical fantasy called for is REPLICATOR PRODUCED fresh from deconstructed sub-atomic particles much more purely than whole cloth.
And, back through the invented centuries, things are automatically adjusted. So, just blink your eyes, Old Reggie, and you’ll awaken to a new reality that’s been adjusted ‘poving’ that the RC edifices was right all along—even long before it existed! LOL.
***Note: I said - and I said it clearly enough - that it was never an issue for Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians to have a pope or bishop or patriarch CHOOSE a successor. That was NEVER a dogmatic necessity for succession. Every Catholic and Orthodox Christian will back me up on that as well.***
I have your back, sir.
The choosing of a new Pope is at the direction of the Church, not at any sniper in the bushes who thinks that they are more in sync with the Lord than the Institution that Jesus created and the Holy Spirit commissioned.
Some are more gracious about providing more suitable material begging for such . . . than others.
IIRC, there’s also a fiercely traditional anti-MODERN RC site. I don’t have the link handy. But he seems to be fiercely against anything more modern than . . . I forget what . . . Methusala [joke]? LOL.
If you bring that sentence in, I can have it shortened by Thursday.
More like the weighted plastic lifesized dolls that when bonked, right themselves on their curved weighted bottoms.
Such games can go on endlessly.
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.