On intemperate and indiscreet zeal. (The Primary Fault of many Religion Forum posters)

Various | Various | Various

[RnMomof7]

I have NO animosity towards Mary, nor do I think any here have ever said they did. I honor her, respect her courage and appreciate the role she played in the birth and life of our savior. It is the over-the-top rhetoric about her that is the turn off and sure sounds like it places the person and work of Christ in a subordinate position. We wonder, then, why must it be such a divisive issue?

You know I rarely even think of her, my mind and heart are on Christ.. We can note that the writers of the Epistles never taught on her or mentioned her....we are to be focused on the Father and come to Him through Christ..

Mary was ordained of God the be the physical mother of His son, She was chosen by Him and we should honor His chosen ones ...but we are to keep our eyes on Christ

[Judith Anne]

So it is really hard for a Catholic to claim that they base the church on the word of God.. and be taken seriously

Surely everyone knows by now that I am not overly concerned with being taken seriously by people who think Catholics are not Christians.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Is salvation an instance of grace or not? How else does Paul say that he saves except being a dispenser , a conduit, of grace? Paul certainly does not think he is the source of salvation.

"If ye have heard of the Dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: how that by revelation He made known unto me, the mystery...which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men as it is now revealed unto His Holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body and partakers of His promise in Christ BY THE GOSPEL..and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been HID IN GOD who created all things by Jesus Christ." (Eph. 3:2,3,5,6,9).

Tell me where Paul says he is the dispenser of grace? He was given by revelation from Christ a new dispensation program. The Dispensation of the Law has been set aside temporarily, and the Dispensation of the Grace of God is now how God is dealing with, or Dispensing, to His people.

The Dispensation of the Grace of God is exactly what it says above: "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body and partakers of His promise in Christ BY THE GOSPEL"

The Word of God is divided dispensationally. God has dispensed different ways His people were to be managed. NOT different people who could dispense salvation to others. 2 Timothy 2:15 should make you understand that the Word of Truth must be rightly divided.

[Judith Anne]

You know I rarely even think of her, my mind and heart are on Christ..

As a Catholic convert, I was the same. No one ever mentioned much about her during RCIA, and she's barely even mentioned in the mass. Furthermore, I didn't see much purpose in the rosary.

Then decades later I came to FR, and all of a sudden, accusations of mariolatry, white hankies, idol worship, etc etc. were flying around, regardless of the facts concerning my Catholic faith. I decided several years ago to take a better look, and amazingly, I found a wonderful wealth of prayer and meditation on the life of Christ in the rosary.

[Utah Binger]

There’s a couple of stretches like that wherever there are hay fields. Up north between Oasis Nevada and Snowville Utah, the same thing happens. We used to take that cutoff when driving all night. I guess they like to see where they are going to die. My son would beg me....Dad, lets take the cutoff...

[xzins]

I have no problem bowing to Rome when Rome is right. Paul also had no problem with Rome.

However, “There is only ONE HIM. He is I AM. How that works is beyond our ken.” is only limited by the number of times the subject comes up in scripture.

I say it is answered. (Also, Cyprian really does say “the three are one.” He just does.)

[roamer_1]

Based on all the prayers to Mary that I've read, that is exactly what the Catholic church sees her as, the one who is doing the dispensing, and that which she is dispensing is the grace itself, not the One who dispenses grace. Any brief perusal of prayers to Mary that anyone can find online, bear that out.

I stand with you on that. It is certainly how it looks from here.

However, I trust that Dawg is doing his best, and is trying to explain things honestly, as he sees them, too.

[roamer_1]

OH DEAR! That would be expecting the Vatican to implement TRUTH IN DOGMA regarding Mary! The whole edifice would crumble!

*chuckles*

Somehow I knew I'd get a ping from you on that. : )

psst! and what you said about it is true. ; )

[small voice in the wilderness]

Your post 1878 is right.

Paul was given the Dispensation of Grace by revelation from Jesus Christ. Does that mean Paul is the dispenser of grace and that we should therefore be praying to Paul, who dispenses this grace? Of course NOT! Nor more that because Mary was full of grace someone should be praying to her to dispense her grace to them.

How does the Word get so twisted that this could even be considered?

[Invincibly Ignorant]

OMG, This is funnier than heck. All the Mormon haters running over here to make sure nobody thinks they’re the “intemperate and indiscreet zeal” posters. lol. This is rich. lol. Thanx for the entertainment.

[roamer_1]

And that is exactly what Jesus did when debating with the Pharisees. He stated the traditions that the Pharisees established and countered with "It is written,...."

There is nowhere in the Bible where I can find that tradition supersedes Scripture. Whenever there's a conflict, it's Scripture that is appealed to. Jesus Himself did it and set the example.

And this is SOOOooo important! If one looks at the Covenants as contracts, it is important to see who those contracts are binding upon. The Father is bound by those contracts far more than man, and by His own device... Who is man to put words in His mouth? What man can change the words of the Holy One?

For goodness sake, Scripture is the Word of God. Tradition is the word of man. What possesses anyone in their right mind to equate the two is beyond me.

It_is_impossible.

No, I take that back. A thirst for power and control has to be it. Only someone who wants total control of others would claim that their words are equivalent to those of God Himself. Claiming to be God's sole mouthpiece on earth with the ability to condemn someone for eternity is blasphemy. God never gave that ability or right to any fallible or easily corruptible man. That's too much power given to one human being to hold over another. God is the final Judge, never any man.

There ya go, making sense. Great post!

[Mad Dawg]

Tell me where Paul says he is the dispenser of grace? Why, in the very first clause of the citation you offer!

"If ye have heard of the Dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward ...

I put this in my hurriedly gathered catalogue last night, but in the RSV, which has the advantage of being written in "English as she is spoke."

Bith in the RSV's use of steward and the (as I assume) KJV's "dispensation" (which, I hasten to point out was not set apart by a Majuscule Initial in the "authorities") the idea is clearly that Paul is given something to distribute.

The steward at the feast has charge of giving out the master's wine. If someone is given a dispensation, (especially, I would suggest, if his initial language is Aramaic or Hebrew with their strong emphasis of verbs) it is at least no LESS likely that he is given the job of dispensing and that he is given the thing already dispensed.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Yes, Mad Dawg, Paul was given a new program, a mystery, hid in God, to dispense. This new program was given by Christ to Paul and from Paul to the Church the Body of Christ. The author of the dispensation is God. The message of that dispensation is given to us through Paul from Jesus Christ. Paul gives us the message. He doesn’t dispense grace, he dispenses the message of God’s grace.

[Mad Dawg]

I think you for the testimonial.

No one will confess faster than I that the LANGUAGE of some Marian stuff is heebie-jeebie provoking.

In a book by St St. Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort (yes, he was French, but he couldn't help it and he didn't mean it, and it's not his fault) (whom I think of as "crazy Louie" -- but I DO love the guy) he even refers to Mary is "divine" in some place or other. And there is this footnote by the editor - rich in a kind of Victorian shock, saying, [O.m. G!] of course [of COURSE, are you listening?] crazy Louie does not mean "divine" in the sense being somehow a God, but in the sense, yatta yatta. ...

I was reading it in bed and I woke up the Ol' Mizris with my laughter at the editor's discomfiture.

In the old days, and still among academic Abnglican circles (when they're not busy engaging in unspeakable acts - bitter? me?) the great C of E clerics during the reign of Charles I, and Charles II, the Sequel are called "The Caroline Divines". So I am used to "Divine used in this broad sense.

For some of us cat'licks, it's still hard to accept that we ought, for the sake of Non-Catholics, to surround all our writings with disclaimers. (Void where prohibited, Not valid in Alaska or Hawaii, This is not an offering -- the offering is made in the prospectus.) We do not always write so as to forestall attacks from our opponents.

SO,for instance, way back before the flood, in the early days of this thread, I mentioned my coming "consecration to Mary." Partially I did that to give you all a thrill. [He said WHAT? Da NOIVE!] But now I should point out that the whole thing is more properly called "total consecration to Jesus Christ through Mary".

I've said this before, to universal rejection, but I'm used to bashing my head against walls, so what they hey?

IF one looks at the el standardo paradigmatic "antiphon" to Mary, The Salve Regina, it certainly appears to pay to her quasi divine, if not outright divine honors. I knew the text for years and would not say it for that reason, though my devotion to Mary was growing (this was before I swam the Tiber).

But one day I was at a Trappist Establishment. I was visiting them to enoy a few days conversation with a hermit nun with whom I had been corresponding, NOT, I hasten to add, about Mary, but about Jesus and prayer.

At the evening of the day, after a day, which had started at 3:00 AM, of many prayers in which Mary was scarcely mentioned at all, at Compline (bedtime prayers), AFTER compline proper, as you might say, they monks sang the Salve. (No incense of fancy ritual was involved. We all sat in chairs [or stood in front of them] arranged in a large semi-circle.)

And I got it; I got it as a love song.

I use extravagant language to my wife and kid, don't you? "You two are everything to me!" But they're not, and they know it. But I'm not writing footnotes and disclaimers when I m telling them how much I love them.

So that's my excuse for the language of some of these devotions. We just assume God loves us and understands the delightful excesses of devotion.

I hasten to add that the tune Dominicans use for the Salve Regina is WAY cooler than the one used by Trappists.

[Mad Dawg]

I'm okay with "dispenser of the Dispenser." The guy who sells the Pez candies is a dispenser. That does not make the plastic thing any less a dispense.

We're very big on what you might think of as cascades of Grace.

Fortunately I have a hotline to the Vatican -- I got PapaBen on speed dial! Of curse, he's off today. I'll hit him tomorrow.

The unwarned would see something absolutely different that you describe.

So get warned, already! What's the big deal? If you look at the words, and if you say or sing them in the context of the WHOLE of Catholic worship, you'd have to be very inattentive to think that we thought or taught that the Creature Mary was on the same level, or above, her Creator.

But I don't think most of our opponents ARE really unwarned. I think they are warned the other way. I remember this woman, who didn't know I was Catholic, solemnly telling me that "They worship Mary, you know." I wonder how much time she had spent researching our worship and theology.

And in any event, I think you are wrong. May I see a show of hands, here? Who in the room thinks the Pez Dispenser manufactures the candy it dispenses?

That's what I thought.

I know, and rejoice in the knowledge, that I introduced "vat." It seems my Catholic forbears introduced dispenser. And I have been, I thought, up front about how I think "dispenser" is kind of funny.

My point was in introducing 'vat' was that our opponents SEEM to want to de-personalize Mary. Yes they talk, without Scriptural warrant - as far as I can tell, about her being 'simple' and 'humble' (and I agree, to a great extent, but see the triumphant tone of her "Magnificat," for a sense of the steel in her - He has sent the rich away EMPTY?, kind of hard on the rich, huh?)

The experience of gestation, parturition, nursing, cuddling, changing ... the way that among some humans there is a tendency to pay something like Divine worship to their own quite obviously carnal offspring (at least until they reach about 18 months of age), all of this predicated upon an act of startling obedience ... all this gets neglected.

"Okay, honey, you squirted Him out, now just go away."
That's not how I view, or treat, any human mother.

[Mad Dawg]

This kind of response betrays the rest of your post.

I find it highly ironic that you seem to have chosen this particular passage - A type of exchange which has always kept us FRiendly while in obvious opposition - That this is the phrase chosen as the exemplar of your ire.

Dawg flips on his back, in submission posture. (which is something to see in a rabid dog.)

I'll go to the substance (koff, koff, if any) later, but I thought I should make my apology clear. I must ask for help in remembering that I am dealing with a host of persons rather than one amorphous foe.

I was wrong. Sorry.

[presently no screen name]

You cannot save me. Your incessant preaching cannot save me. I have no interest in either.

Well, if nothing else, at least you know you need to be saved.

I couldn't save a knat and neither can Mary, His faithful servant. We are saved BY FAITH through GRACE (His Grace) and the Holy Spirit does the drawing in. The RCC has tried to usurp HIS job, also. They have Mary doing it all when she can't do ONE thing. She needed a Savior herself.

Disagreeing with YOU is NOT "intentionally lying [my] way out" of anything. If Mad Dawg has answered something, I am not "USING" him if I refer someone to his post.

You took what I said and said I agree the RCC is HIS Church. When you know otherwise! That's deception. Holy Scriptures PROVE the RCC is not HIS church. That matter is settled!

The RCC is in direct opposition of those Scriptures - with a whole new mindset of their own - and thus created a whole new religion.

From the infallibility of the Pope and ALL his pomp and circumstance - to the vast 'crowns' of Mary, claiming she was born w/o original sin, praying to saints, praying to/for the dead, mortal and venial sin etc., etc., etc.

The RCC can do what they want - many others have done the same - but they can NEVER claim to be HIS Church. HIS church are those who HEAR, BELIEVE and OBEY and NOT lean unto their own understanding (reasoning) - like that lady "God bless the mother who bore you"......and yet, the RCC - in deliberate defiance - say Mary is Mother of the Eucharist, Mary, Queen of Heaven, PRAY to Mary, she leds you to Jesus, and all the other titles/crown you have bestowed on her EXCEPT the CROWN of THORNS - maybe next week.

The RCC created their OWN religion. It's not, merely, a difference in one or two Scripture - it's a difference in the whole fabric of HIS WORD.

Seeing RED this morning? You might want to apologize to Quix.

[Mad Dawg]

I get that some of you are, unaccountably, unconvinced by my fabulous arguments. So here's the clincher:

Catholics, indeed, Dominicans, introduced CHOCOLATE to Western Europe. AND Pope Saint Pius the V^th, OP, said that to take chocolate on Friday was not a violation of the Friday fast.

For those of you from Rio Linda, "OP" stands for Ordo Praedicatorum [I THINK that's right] or the "Order of Preachers" aka "Dominicans".)

I rest my case.

[Mad Dawg]

I couldn't save a knat and neither can Mary, His faithful servant.

Gnor can we, knot by ourselves. Pnor (as in pneumonia) can any creature.

If the object of the game is to prove the Catholics wrong by hook or by crook, it's so much easier to argue against what they do gNOT think.

We, as I said, think in cascades, and we delight in the last rock shelf over which the water descends, as well as, though knot to the same extent as, we rejoice in the source of the water.

We praise God and say not only "How great thou art," but also "How wonderful are Your ways," and no amount of non-Catholic wet-blanket will stifle our delight in God's grace and in all the means thereof.

[presently no screen name]

Mormon haters?

Wouldn’t it be more honest to say - they are exposing the teachings of Mormonism. I have found no hatred towards those who follow LDS teachings but a warning to them.

To warn is to love - Jesus warned us many times of pitfalls - so we know they are out there. I’m sure those posters who have been there and back know a bit more than those still entrenched. Not everyone will give up their time and energy to help someone. Most say, ‘Hey, let them learn the hard way; at least, I’m out’.

FWIW, I have no connection nor ever did with the LDS and know no one who is. However, I learned about it here - so if all the warnings fall on deaf ears to those still entrenched, their posts are very valuable to those with a total lack of knowledge on LDS.

They can’t make them drink the water of life - God’s Truth - but they are instructed to show them where it is - deception vs His Truth. It’s then when one choses either ‘His Will HIS WAY or their will.

To call ‘warnings’ hate should be a warning sign to you. God’s Word is full of warnings. I’m sure a robber hates their intended victim to be forewarned.