Posted on 04/30/2010 8:03:48 AM PDT by Quix
Sounds lovely. A great Sunday for Mary’s month of May.
I guess we should all be Quakers or Yankee Unitarians.
NOT my logic.
I do not construe it that BECAUSE there are other such personages, the caricatured Mary personage is not kosher etc.
No. That’s not it.
Not sure I can wrap my fingers around this briefly and coherently . . . but here goes . . .
1. The parallels between the pagan manifestations and the excesses in the name of the caricatured Mary are plentiful beyond disturbing, to put it politely.
2. The gross lack of Biblical support for such coupled with a great amount of serious proscription against such in Scripture is far more than disturbing.
3. The competition for attention, time, energy, resources, focus with God Almighty, Jesus The Christ, Holy Spirit—whether folks within the box can see it, or not, is abjectly horrendously awful.
I’ll stop there.
The problem with Scripture-only is that you are missing the primary teachings of Christ. Jesus taught orally, and so did the early Church. Paul is the first of the NT writings that we know of, only an early draft of Matthew might have preceded it.
Not being a member of the "Reformed churches" that you refer to, we stick to what is revealed by God through the writings of Christ's inspired writers of the Bible.
While missing the teachings of the Lord himself.
The assembly I affiliate with follows the lead of the Apostles as they taught everything that Jesus told them to. We do not add nor subtract from what is written, period.
Negative. You do not follow the Didache, for instance. I will assume that you do not have the Deutercanonicals in your Bibles either.
I'd suggest a second look at the Pauline letters and especially his relationships with Timothy and some of his other subordinates. The relationship of Luke to both Peter and Paul, and Mark to Peter might also be relevant.
Thanks for the suggestion. That's exactly what we did, and we don't only read it two times, but as often as we are led by the spirit to do.
I'd suggest putting aside the Jack Daniels and reading it sober. Paul clearly outlines the growing hierarchy of the Church under himself; and so does the rest of the NT.
And, pray tell, just what are those "heresies" you think we favour? I'd like to know what they are!
The first is subordinationalism, as expressly outlined in the letters of Dickenson that you have copiously posted. After seeing that, I simply will write off whatever it is that a failed Catholic has fallen into, as so many have.
To answer this, since I assume that you are writing from an America-centric POV, none so far in this country. We do know of high level negotiations, but we have no evidence that any American Catholic politician has been excommunicated. As they should. I have berated our last bishop in public and had a good deal of diocesan support.
My mother shot down this kind of logic when I was about six years old by saying she didn't care what others did, I was not to set fire to the neighbor's chicken coop and then she thrashed me soundly. I wasn't any worse than the other kids so why should I get a beating? And some kids really were hoodlums unlike myself.
I cannot argue with that logic. It is a shame in Church history and was wrong then and is wrong now. Yet the Church has come to admit its faults over the last several centuries. Look at the Jews saved by the Vatican - through the Vatican gates - during WWII from the Nazis and Fascisti. Balancing virtue against the cost, pragmatism wins outs out everytime somehow.
No; the goodness of God wins out everytime, somehow. It is just so long in coming sometimes...
Even if you didn’t consider your first point, the similarities to pagan religions, which I was not really aware of, so much of the teaching about Mary can be shown to be erroneous with Scripture, right out of the gospels.
The other issue IS the competition in time that God gets from Mary.
Every minute you give attention to her is one minute you are robbing God of.
Considering that we only have so much time in one day, why would you want to spend your time of devotion and prayer on another human being instead of God Himself. Why do that on someone who can’t do anything for you anyway, in direct disobedience to Christ’s command to pray to the Father, in the Lord’s prayer.
CERTAINLY I fiercely agree! LOL. SIGH.
IOW, the Gospel writers DIDN'T relate the primary teachings of Jesus in their accounts? They wasted their time on less important teachings of secondary matters?
It would be nice, though to see a kind of clarification along the lines of, "The existence of other 'Queen of Heaven' ideas does not in itself prove that the Catholics are wrong about Mary.But IF they're wrong, they're REAL wrong! And We think they're wrong because of THESE reasons over here."
BTW: If logic can be owned by any created person, it ain't logic, IMHO.
And in spite of that, Catholics consider the Gospels to be the writings that the Bible is to be interpreted by?
Catholics sure are quick enough to quote out of the Gospels when they need to support some Catholic tradition.
I understand that.
2 personal problems of mine hinder my providing that.
1. I don’t really feel up to it in several ways.
2. It’s just not a very high priority, to me.
3. I have a long list of higher priorities.
4. When and if I have something compiled along those lines, will certainly ping you.
assuming the net is still up by then.
Of course.
They don’t want to admit that the real title is
Roman DoubleStandard Catholic et al Vatican Institution
If not, then all this harping on "in direct disobedience to Christ’s command to pray to the Father, in the Lord’s prayer," is tendentious nonsense.
And if that's all the praying you then you are ignoring the advice to make prayers and supplications and give thanks for all men.
And the reason I pose this is as a "meta-comment" on the notion that, "so much of the teaching about Mary can be shown to be erroneous with Scripture, right out of the gospels."
The short way of saying it is that I am not going to except any alleged argument from someone who on Monday, Wednesdays, and Fridays says we should only pray the Lord's Prayer, and on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays says we should do what St. Paul says, and then on Sunday talks about proving stuff from Scripture.
One thing I've learned here on FR is that Scripture is an ink-blot without an authoritative hermeneutic. And what I mean by ink-blot is that, without an authoritative hermeneutic, people find it in what they put in it.
They related many of them, sure. But the primary teachings were oral, not written.
And the Gospels are the quoted Words of God (Jesus). Why should we not quote them? We worship the Triune God, not some second millennium fantasy.
INCLUDING
the RC’s!
Take your time, amigo. Priorities count, and this is low on my list too.
Negative.
Call it the teachings of Jesus the Christ as He told it to the Apostles and His disciples. As opposed to fantastic theologies derived by men in their cups or magic mushrooms or peyote or LSD, that we see littering the landscape and purporting to be Christian.
No. The only prayer I ever pray now that I’ve become a Christian, is TO God, modeled on the Lord’s Prayer.
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.