The Worship of Mary? (An Observation)

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.

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.

“It is through the liturgy, especially the divine Eucharistic Sacrifice, that the work of our redemption is exercised.” (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, paragraph 2)

“Under this sign the scattered sons of God are being gathered into one {cf. Jn. 11:52} until there is one fold and one shepherd {cf. Jn 10:16}” (Ibid, paragraph 2)

“Just as Christ was sent by the Father, so also he sent the apostles, filled with the Holy Spirit . . . that they might exercise the work of salvation which they were proclaiming; by means of sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves.” (Ibib, paragraph 6)

Never mind that in Christ's earthly ministry He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15; Romans 15:8) And as far as his Apostles had any revelation, that's what they were to continue. Until after the conversion of Paul, the Apostles stayed to the Jews and Samaritans in the Jewish homeland (and proselytes to Judaism). That God would send Peter to to a Gentile's house (Acts 10) was a complete shock to Peter himself.

After returning from Cornelius’ house to Jerusalem (Acts 11) Peter is “brought up on charges” by the Eleven and the others in the Jerusalem Church for going among Gentiles.

In Acts chapter 8, there had been a persecution that scattered the Jerusalem church, EXCEPT THE APOSTLES, beyond Judea and Samaria. Yes the Twelve Apostles stayed put in the land of the Jews, because, “as the Father hath sent me,” Jesus Christ had instructed them, “SO SEND I YOU.” (John 20). Jesus said that He was NOT SENT BUT TO the lost sheep of the House of Israel (Matthew ch. 15). Paul confirms that Jesus Christ was MINISTER TO THE CIRCUMCISION to confirm the promises made unto the fathers (Romans 15:8).

The church Christ was speaking of in Matthew 16, then was, and will be an Israelite church; a church for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. It was not, nor is it now a Gentile church with any perpetuity on earth as long as that Nation, Israel, is under the condemnation of blindness pronounced in Isaiah chapter 6, Matthew chapter 13, and Acts chapter 28. These are the three parallel passages in which blindness is pronounced for Israel's rejection of Jehovah (Old Testament), rejection of God manifest in the flesh (Gospel records), and rejection of the Holy Spirit's ministry (Acts period - about 38 years after the Resurrection)

The preaching in Acts chapters 1-7 is one hundred percent to Israel as a Nation. The church there is the same ISRAELITE church, being promised the return of their Messiah and King to rule on David's throne, if the nation would repent (See Acts 3:19-26).

There is NO church, denomination, or organization visible on Earth today that has any resemblance to the Israelite Church of Matthew chapter 16 or Acts chapters 2-7, whether it call itself Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Apostolic, Messianic, Orthodox, Mormon (LDS), Bible, Watchtower, The Way, Charismatic, “Emerging,” submerging, or anything else.

All the way through Acts 11, those Jewish, Israelite believers, waiting for Israel's leaders to repent, went everywhere preaching to Gospel to none but to the Jews only. (Acts 11:19).

Any visible church in this age, regardless of how devoted it is to its own name, if it claims any Apostolic succession or any perpetuity of authority, must mold it in the presses of its own power hungry imaginations.

The only way to be a church modeled after that of Acts chapters 2-7 would be to preach the same message. That message is formulated expressly accuse Israel of the murder of the Messiah, and to terminate at a specific command to ISRAEL to repent.

If any individual or church is going to insist that, as God the Father sent Christ, so He sent their church, then that individual or church must get busy!

1. Stand, as Peter did, before the Nation of Israel on a recognized Israeli Feast Day (Pentecost, Leviticus chapter 23 - No more designed to be a church observance than than your Grandpa's Hudson was intended to race the Titanic);

2. preach the blood-guilty-ness of that generation of Israel that conspired to put Him on the Cross, demand the repentance of that generation;

3. As Peter and Stephen both did, Go through the history of Israel to bring that generation up to snuff, emphasizing the plan of God to re-establish the Davidic Kingdom on this Earth;

4. Declare that God does not dwell in temples made with hands, as Stephen and Paul both did (this is totally ignored by virtually all churches in our generation, as they spend $Missions in God's money to build elaborate and ornate church edifices, temples, shrines, statues, etcetera);

5. Preach to Israel (this was Peter's message) that if they would repent of their crime of murdering their King, God would then send Him back to the earth; etc. etc. etc.

Which church in 2008 has these things incorporated into its message? NO visible church on earth fits the description.

Awaiting Israel's repentance, and the consequent return of their King to the earth, the believers gave up all of their worldly possessions. They sold all they had, including houses and lands, and entered a practice of “Messianic Communism.” All goods and the proceeds from the sale of their real estate was laid at the Apostles’ feet for equal redistribution to all, as every one had need.

Any church visible on earth today practicing this? Those Messianic Israelites believed Jesus Christ would return to this earth under the condition of the repentance of Israel, and so they would not need their properties or their personal wealth.

Now where is THAT Apostolic church today? It doesn't exist.

“To accomplish so great a work, Christ is always present in His Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of the minister, “the same one now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross”, but especially under the Eucharistic species.” (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, paragraph 2)

Nowhere in the New Testament is “priest” connected with a church, UNLESS that church is ISRAEL. Nowhere is the word “priest” found between the books of Acts and Hebrews. The Apostle Paul doesn't mention priests in 13 books written to New Testament Christians. No reference in Hebrews is to the churches, but to Israel's priests.

When Hebrews was written, it was written to (Anybody care to guess?) . . . HEBREWS. The Jerusalem Temple was still standing when Paul wrote Hebrews to Hebrews. The Israelitish priesthood had not yet been disbanded. The priests in Hebrews that brought sacrifices, were bringing lambs and bullocks and turtledoves. They were not bringing “SPECIES” of wafers to put on anybody tongue.

“Nevertheless, the liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed, at the same time, it is the fountain from which all her power flows. For the goal of apostolic works is that all who are made sons of God by faith and baptism should come together to praise God in the midst of His Church, to take part in her sacrifice, and to eat the Lord's supper . . . From the liturgy therefore, and especially from the Eucharist, as from a fountain, grace is channeled into us. . . “ (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, paragraph 10)

“. . . praise God in the midst of His Church, . . .”

For serious Bible study, after one has read the V-II comic books, one can see that the CSL, paragraph 10, borrows from Psalm 22:22 — Ps 22:22 “I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.”

Great verse, and again, it is an ISRAELITE congregation, not a perpetual visible earthly Gentile denomination, organization or monstrosity.

The verse is quoted using the word, “church” in Hebrews (NOTE HEBREWS!) 2:12 — “Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.”

Now, turn to Acts 7:38 — This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: . . . “

“. . . church in the wilderness . . . “

Do you see how that in the New Testament, “ekklesia” (church) taking the place of the Hebrew “kahal” can be speaking of something entirely Israelitish/Jewish?

When you read your New Testament, and when you see the word “church,” remember that it can be a reference to prophetic Israel as a “called-out assembly” or “congregation,” and not necessarily anything we have known on this earth since Acts chapter 16.

“Church” in Matthew chapter 16 and Acts chapter 2 refers to something Jesus Christ will build out of Israel, when the nation repents. It is in abeyance currently (since Acts 28) for Israel's failure to repent under the ministry of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles.

It will be built, as Jesus Christ promised. The closest Israel got to it was in Acts chapters 2-7. Had Israel repented, the horrors of Daniel's Seventieth Week of prophecy would have commenced, and the Davidic Kingdom would have been set up by Jesus Christ Himself, and He would have begun His reign from David's throne in Jerusalem.

Wait, wait! I'm Googling the patron saint of concrete, I'm sure there's one here somewhere.
(I'm kidding. not really Googling.)

Um, that is SEW not FAY-ur! God hears the prayers of Protestants. He just winces a little

/s backatcha

If you want a more accurate caricature of our belief and practice, I'd suggest "spray and pray". Today is a "Solemnity" That's the highest rank of whoopee we have, though some solemnities are whoopier than others: Easter, Xmas, Pentecost, for example, are way more whoopee than SS Peter and Paul.

SO being filthy papists and all, part of our prayers are aimed at Peter and Paul asking them to intercede for us. And then at least one prayer was aimed at the Father, specifically asking him to accept the intercessions of Peter and Paul and to use it for our good and so forth.

Here's one such: Lord our God,
Encourage us through the prayers of Saints Peter and Paul.
May the apostles who strengthened the faith of the infant Church help us on our way of salvation.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Now I know that you all think that prayers to the saints are silly or worse. But at least note that along with those prayers are also prayers to God asking Him to accept and use the prayers of the saints.

I have this image of a beggar in a palace courtyard. Most of the time he's just yelling, "Hey! King! I have a need!" But sometimes he stops anyone who is headed toward the palace and says, "Hey, if you're going in there, would you please tell the king that I need such and such?" And then he turns back to the palace and yells, "hey Kind. I need such and such. Some guys are coming in there with a message from me. Please listen to them!"

I think our attitude is, "Ask. Ask. It's always a good idea to ask."

Something like that.

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.