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.
And to to your question, I vbelieve the naswer is
Soft Drink Information for $500 Alec,
The question is:
What is a
Royal Crown Cola Catechism?
I thought it might be a method for teaching using radio-controlled cars.
***You cannot delete your own posts but you can ask a moderator to do it either by Freepmail, ping or abuse report.***
Thank you.
***And a gibbbbbbbbberish here
And a gibbbbbbbbberish there
And Mildred’s 3 behind the sofa.
And a gibbbbbbbbberish here
And a gibbbbbbbbberish there
And Uncle Farnsworth’s heading for the barn
While Mildred’s hunting gibberishes behind the sofa.
And a gibbergibberish here
And a gibbergibberish there
And Uncle Farnsworth was
Assaulted by a flock of
Very black gibbergibberishes
The moment he opened the barn door.
Whereupon Mildred stuck her head up
From behind the sofa with it
All covered in gibbbbbberishes.
Alas her son watching
THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL on the Telly
Told her they were just dust bunnys—to try again.
But when she flipped red striped bloomers up
And dust bunny covered head down to search
Yet again for gibbbbbberishes
Jr Farnsworth wished he’d suggested, instead
That she go chase the rabbits out of the rutabagas.***
Applause. At first glance, I thought that you meant Philo Farnsworth, who ought to burn in hell for what he helped inflict on the world. :)
***Where is any office mentioned in Matthew chapter 21? It might be said that Jesus Christ paid more attention to Peter and favored him above the others. If that is any reason to create an office, then should not the Apostle Paul be given that office? Should not Paul should be the Vicar of Christ in the New Testament.***
Well, Peter is the first amongst the Apostles. When Jesus speaks to them all, he usually speaks to Peter as first amongst them and sometimes he speaks to Peter directly as an order to him alone.
For example, John 21:
1
1 After this, Jesus revealed himself again to his disciples at the Sea of Tiberias. He revealed himself in this way.
2
Together were Simon Peter, Thomas called Didymus, Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, Zebedee’s sons, 2 and two others of his disciples.
3
3 Simon Peter said to them, “I am going fishing.” They said to him, “We also will come with you.” So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
4
When it was already dawn, Jesus was standing on the shore; but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.
5
Jesus said to them, “Children, have you caught anything to eat?” They answered him, “No.”
6
So he said to them, “Cast the net over the right side of the boat and you will find something.” So they cast it, and were not able to pull it in because of the number of fish.
7
So the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord.” When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he tucked in his garment, for he was lightly clad, and jumped into the sea.
8
The other disciples came in the boat, for they were not far from shore, only about a hundred yards, dragging the net with the fish.
9
4 When they climbed out on shore, they saw a charcoal fire with fish on it and bread.
10
Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you just caught.”
11
So Simon Peter went over and dragged the net ashore full of one hundred fifty-three 5 large fish. Even though there were so many, the net was not torn.
12
Jesus said to them, “Come, have breakfast.” And none of the disciples dared to ask him, 6 “Who are you?” because they realized it was the Lord.
13
Jesus came over and took the bread and gave it to them, and in like manner the fish.
14
7 This was now the third time Jesus was revealed to his disciples after being raised from the dead.
15
8 9 10 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.”
16
He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.”
17
He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” (Jesus) said to him, “Feed my sheep.
Peter is directed to be the Vicar, the Steward of Christ. And he is mentioned in the Gospels (excepting Jesus) more than all the others put together.
Paul has his own ministry; but even Paul defers to Peter.
He came to the Apostles and had to have Peter convinced that he was indeed appointed by Christ.
***A perpetual office at that? How is any perpetuity of any OFFICE taught in Matthew ch. 16? Logically, if Matthew 16 is teaching a perpetuity of OFFICE, then shouldn’t Peter himself should be getting as much OR MORE attention than Mary?***
Why would Jesus build His Church upon the human Peter if that Church would die with Peter?
***Actually, if I were to select a place where I thought Peter was installed as a pope, I think it should be when he walked on water. And the installation would be when Christ’s hand touched Peters. Is that not great stuff?***
That’s why we have the Church and not the teachings or whims or hallucinations of men.
No sacrifice BUT Christ.
I'll use any and all opportunities for you to read the truth one more time.
***No way. Every Protestant armchair quarterback reserves the right to sit back and critique everything that the Pope does - up to and including the right to say the phrase - the Rock is Christ and therefore anything you say is invalid.
Untrue. Nonsensical. Juvenile. Childish prattle.***
Really? You must not have been paying attention on this or so many other threads.
***Actually, if I were to select a place where I thought Peter was installed as a pope, I think it should be when he walked on water. And the installation would be when Christ’s hand touched Peters. Is that not great stuff?
But he didn’t have enough faith to accomplish the task. Matthew 14:30.***
I don’t think that any of them really understood Jesus to be God until Pentecost. There were hints and attempts to get through to them, though. Peter was gotten to enough that Jesus pinned the office of Pope on him.
***Your question seems odd to me. I believe in the communion of the saints and do not believe in purgatory. These two things are mutually exclusive.***
The communion of saints is what the Church says it is, not an anonymous poster on FR. Reminds me of an individual that made the statement that he could not accept anything published by the Church in the 4th century or later. Obviously he didn’t realize that the Bible was canonized and the Nicene and Athenasian Creeds were developed after this arbitrary point in time.
***As for Christ descending into hell, certainly there are “Christians” who don’t want to believe it but my mother-in-law went to a Catholic church for years where the priest preached there was no such person as Satan.***
Very odd. Satan exists; he is active and vigilant in the gathering of souls. There are bad Catholics; there are bad priests. Someone should have notified the Bishop; the Bishop really ought to have known, if he was a good one.
Your verses do not show predestination to hell.
***”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:
And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory.” — Romans 9:22-23 ***
Nothing about hell.
***”Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.” — Ephesians 1:5-6 ***
Nothing about hell.
***”For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ” — 1 Thessalonians 5:9 ***
Nothing about hell.
***”And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.” — 1 Peter 2:8***
Even this bad translation of the KJV says nothing about hell, only that those who are not obediant to God will stumble against Jesus.
***”The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” — Proverbs 16:4 ***
Let us go to the NAB for commentary: The favorable or unfavorable result of chance depends on God. Deciding strifes and doubts by lot was practiced by the ancient Hebrews; cf Exodus 28:15-30; Lev 16:8; Joshua 7:14; 1 Sam 10:20-21.
You have posted no verse that supports predestination to hell. You last attempt included a rather feeble attempt to make James support it. Your Calvin was a monster, creating monstrous theology in direct opposition to the love and the mercy of Christ. I do not know what anyone would support it; I believe that you love your family and that you are a good person. Why would you believe in a theology of death?
***So I guess there was Scripture before Carthage, well that is a start.***
There were all sorts of writings including the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Apocalypse of Peter and so on. Didn’t mean it was true and inspired.
***Guess what, the Assumption (Stick to the subject matter) was never “inspired” yet or included ANYWHERE***
Most Church teachings then were not codified. People simply knew what was being taught because of the oral tradition. Councils were convened in response to heresies or other concerns. The difference between the Church and the Protestants is that we understand that the Church is the authority; the Protestants think that a piece of paper is.
Okay, thanks for the clarification and sorry for the trouble.
***Mark often seems to repeat what he wants to hear, rather than what he’s heard, as evidenced in this post.***
Posting verse that means different than, or sometimes opposite to, what you claim it means does not provide proof.
You and I have been down this road many times. Many or most of you quoted Scripture means different than what you say it does.
Ironically, Mary Magdalene was by far the most faithful yet the Christian Church gives her short shrift.
***Well, Mark said I didn’t give him a list of verses and I certainly did give him a list of verses, as the evidence shows.***
I said that you gave me no verses that gave proof.
***It was either an oversight or intentional. Since Mark actually responded to my post, it certainly looks like he read my post, realized I had responded to his post and yet he denied it.
What’s that called? A senior moment? An oversight? An error?
***
Hmmm. Why don’t we go back and see what I actually posted?
***To: tiki; Dr. Eckleburg
***Berating you for posting Scripture is spam but I didn’t hear anyone whine at the list post which was really spam from an anti-Catholic website.***
I like to leave the whining to the whiners. The Bible Believers (tm) ignore huge swathes of the Bible, normally preferring misinterpretation of Paul to Jesus.
I have asked the good Dr. E. to provide a list of verses that prove predestination to hell, but she has been unable to do so. A feeble misinterpretation of James (who would never postulate such a thing) is the best that she has been able to come up with.
5,544 posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 7:54:30 PM by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
***
I asked you to provide a list of verse that prove predestiation to hell and stated that you did not do so. You have not to this point in time - you have given verses which mean different things but you have given no proof.
You misstate what has actually gone on. It’s not the first time and it probably won’t be the last. I am grateful that the record stands and that your prevarication is exposed.
Again, I challenge you to provide verse that proves predestination to hell. I will bet that you cannot.
***We all make choices every day. But a man whose fallen nature has not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit can never choose righteousness.***
Matt 7:
15
9 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.
16
By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
17
Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit.
18
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit.
19
Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.
20
So by their fruits you will know them.
During my absence here, I think that you have demonstrated some very rotten fruit.
The wicked are born wicked
Psalm 9:17
they are sent to Hell
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.