Boss...Boss!
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.
The name came later; but they were Catholic nonetheless.
Amen, Dr. E. Thanks. No matter what you say to some here, they don’t believe it. Christ died once and for all for our sins. When we sin, we confess our sins through our ONLY mediator, Jesus Christ. He then cleanses us from all unrighteousness. What part of this don’t these folk understand?
Greetings, and happy to be plagiarized! (Click on my profile, please)
Your dysopia does not detract from the truth of this matter.
And Protestantism hasn’t developed traditions?
There have been innumerable holy men writing about holiness. What separates such advice from Scripture is the authoritative endorsement of the Church.
The protestant desire to believe made-up stuff.
what about the ‘laying on of hands” and the snake handlers?
Wasn’t that something? What blasphemy.
I think you mean stiff-necked anti-papist snake handlers.
So what prompted you to undertake such a study in the first place? Further, what are your qualifications to undertake such a study?
whoa! great. how few people get that.ha.
LOL!! thanks for the correction.
I didn’t.
You didn’t stop?
Nope. It’s my only form of exercise...
Your attempt at sarcasm indicates my point is made.
You are not really that old are you? Why you would be close to Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks 2000 year old man. However, your interpretation was in a state of flux until Boniface III “Unam Sanctum” (1302) and made final in the Catholic Church in Vatican I, “The First Dogmatic Constitution of the Church of Christ” (1870). Cyprian in the 3rd century started to interpret the passage according to the Catholic Church's interpretation, but later withdrew his work during a prolonged argument with Pope Stephen.
One has to remember that during the time between the 6th to the 16th century the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church were the only interpretive games in town.
Not sarcasm, Petronski, it was a JOKE. Which of course is lost on you.
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.