Posted on 12/17/2010 7:31:07 AM PST by marshmallow
Back when I first joined YIMCatholic, I was going to write posts about my conversion. I hammered out seven posts in pretty rapid succession and then, I stopped writing them until recently.
Many of my posts now are simply my observations of the world which are colored through the lens of a convert to Catholicism. It would be difficult for them not to be. Other posts I've written are of the "look what I just found!" variety, and the "I want to share this with you" type. Call them the discovery posts if you will.
Recently I gave a talk on the Communion of Saints for my parishes RCIA group. Consequently, I've been answering questions of potential converts that have prompted me to explain my conversion to others.
Basically, this has resulted in my having become a neophyte evangelist of sorts for the Church. And though this blog space isn't the forum for heavy-duty apologetics, because others do that better elsewhere, I have always seen my role here at YIMC as one of evangelizing.
Back to my conversion story, when I was first confronting the idea of becoming a Catholic, I had to look hard at the question "Why am I Protestant?" Having just moved cross-country following my retirement from the Marines, I found out that my mother no longer went to church where we had gone when I was growing up. Instead of the non-denominational church I grew up in (and which we were a founding family of), I learned that she now went to a Presbyterian church instead. Hmmm.
Rather than start visiting all kinds of churches, which appealed to me about as much as shopping for a new car, my family and I kept going to the local Catholic parish in our new town while I did research and home improvement projects. One of the first things I looked into was the problem of Catholics and their obviously misguided devotion to the Virgin Mary.
The funny thing is, I had sat in the pews in the Catholic Church with my wife for close to 18 years and I had never really noticed any wacky or overly zealous devotion to Mary. Not at Mass, anyway, and as we didn't stick around much after the conclusion of Mass, I didn't see anything that made me uncomfortable. Truthfully, I was surprised about this and it's probably a big reason why I continued to sit in the pews with my patient Catholic wife for that long a time.
This didn't stop me from believing that weird Marian devotions were happening though, and I assumed talk of her perpetual virginity was just "crazy talk." Like most, I had no idea what the Immaculate Conception was either and I just thought people were referring to Our Lord's conception. I was ignorant, plain and simple. But I had in mind a mission to correct the wrong religious track that my family was on so I started planning the military campaign to retake the spiritual territory I had ceded to the Church. My first target was what I thought would be the easiest: Mary.
Before I went on my "destroy Marian Devotion" offensive, though, I knew I would have to do a little homework. Planning ahead, you see, I figured the best place to start was with the guys who picked up the Protestant Reformation football and ran with it for touchdowns. Follow the winners Frank, and victory will be yours!
But get this. Much to my surprise, nay, shock(!) I had to throw a penalty flag on myself and look for a different angle of attack. Because what I found out was that the Big Three "Reformers" all agreed with the Catholic Church's teachings on the Mother of God!
Here is what I found, courtesy of the site catholicapologetics.info,
Martin Luther:
Mary the Mother of God
Throughout his life Luther maintained without change the historic Christian affirmation that Mary was the Mother of God:
"She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God ... It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God."
Perpetual Virginity
Again throughout his life Luther held that Mary's perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians - and interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was "born of a woman" alone.
"It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin."
The Immaculate Conception
Yet again the Immaculate Conception was a doctrine Luther defended to his death (as confirmed by Lutheran scholars like Arthur Piepkorn). Like Augustine, Luther saw an unbreakable link between Mary's divine maternity, perpetual virginity and Immaculate Conception. Although his formulation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not clear-cut, he held that her soul was devoid of sin from the beginning:
"But the other conception, namely the infusion of the soul, it is piously and suitably believed, was without any sin, so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin..."
Assumption
Although he did not make it an article of faith, Luther said of the doctrine of the Assumption:
"There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know."
Honor to Mary
Despite his unremitting criticism of the traditional doctrines of Marian mediation and intercession, to the end Luther continued to proclaim that Mary should be honored. He made it a point to preach on her feast days.
"The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart."
"Is Christ only to be adored? Or is the holy Mother of God rather not to be honoured? This is the woman who crushed the Serpent's head. Hear us. For your Son denies you nothing." Luther made this statement in his last sermon at Wittenberg in January 1546.
John Calvin:
It has been said that John Calvin belonged to the second generation of the Reformers and certainly his theology of double predestination governed his views on Marian and all other Christian doctrine . Although Calvin was not as profuse in his praise of Mary as Martin Luther he did not deny her perpetual virginity. The term he used most commonly in referring to Mary was "Holy Virgin".
"Elizabeth called Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God."
"Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ." Calvin translated "brothers" in this context to mean cousins or relatives.
"It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor."
"To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son."
Ulrich Zwingli:
"It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God."
"I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." Zwingli used Exodus 4:22 to defend the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity.
"I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary."
"Christ ... was born of a most undefiled Virgin."
"It was fitting that such a holy Son should have a holy Mother."
"The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow."
I remember being blown away by these revelations. I had gone to Christian churches my whole life and I had been told what I was supposed to believe, and I had never been told these things about Mary. I felt a little bit like the fellow wearing tan below, even though I was really acting like the guy wearing black.
And then I thought, "methinks they dost protest too much." And like young Skywalker above, I too leaped with faith and lived to tell the tale. I didn't land on my feet though. Instead, I landed in the lap of Blaise Pascal.
And so began the process of my going back to the Scriptures and to the Church Fathers and back through the history of the Catholic Church, and finally back into the arms of Christ's Church Herself.
Perhaps this post is a prequel in the 2BFrank saga. Sheeeesh!
To read more about the Protestant Reformers views on the Blessed Virgin Mary, and to track down the footnotes too, head on over to catholicapologetics.info. Head over to Scripture Catholic too, and bring your Bibles. Then head over to the Vatican and look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well.
“Son here is your Mother”
“Mother here is your son”
She is our mother and sister and daughter, as Christ is our brother and father and Son.
That much is clear.
We are commanded to pray for one another. Do you also remember how Jesus taught the disciples to pray??
“...our Father”
We are also taught by scripture, by Jesus, that we are to ask in His name. The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit. The Triune God.
Where’s the command to pray to anyone else? Mary can’t hear you. St. So-and-So can’t hear you—only God is omniscient and omnipresent.
Why waste time praying to Mary (and you are praying, by the way—how else could you claim she hears you) when it’s God who demands we pray to and worship him alone ?
You see where I’m going with this then.
We believe that Christ is bodily present in the bread and the wine. Every mass concludes with the presentation, where Christ is distributed out to all the body of believers. He is the focus of every one of our worship services.
Yes, I’m well aware of the Our Father prayer, and we pray the our father whenever we wish.
“Where’s the command to pray to anyone else?”
I’m not sure why the syntax is so difficult. We pray only TO Christ. We are commanded to pray FOR one another as brothers and sisters in Christ, as are the Saints in Heaven. This means that Mary is called to pray FOR us just as we are called to pray FOR one another.
You are correct that God demands we pray TO him alone.
“The Church” didn’t provide the Ten Commandments, either. And it sure is obvious they don’t follow them.
I can say with all authority (for myself) that the sky is green. That does not make it so.
Just because the Roman Catholic Church makes a proclamation about something doesn’t change the fact that it is against God’s commandments!!
Hoss
I cannot read your mind, and I do not wish to assume where you are getting this from.
So I ask, what is the citation from scripture?
How do you know that Catholics worship the statues? What makes a graven image is whether or not one worships the object instead of God himself.
You are quite right that the statues are not in and of themselves required, and the Catholic church does not require them. Some choose to erect memorials to the Saints in their honour. Some do not.
Then why do you pray to Mary? That syntax is pretty simple as well!
You cannot have it both ways, no matter how badly you want to.
Hoss
And here I thought a believer in sola scriptura would instantly recognise the reference.
Unsurprisingly disappointed.
We don’t pray TO Mary.
We ask Mary to pray for us.
That is the exact wording of the Rosary,
Holy Mary, Mother of God
Pray for us Sinners,
Now and at the hour of our death, Amen.
And those that do may be committing idolatry. If they venerate anyone or anything othr than God— idolatry. Mariolatry just happens to be one of the subjects here.
Hoss
D-fendr wrote:
“With errors in who Mary is, you’ll often find errors in who Christ is. The two tend to go together - which is why the Council that decreed Mary as Theotokos was all about Christology. Recall that, even using the same scripture, the Trinity was argued for centuries.”
I certainly agree with your statement. But error cuts both ways here. And if any individual doesn’t think so, then he/she is very likely in error that other way. There is no locus (doctrine) of theology of which this is not true.
CLEAR from WHERE? JESUS IS VERY CLEAR about who His mother and brother are and it’s not according to man’s understanding. Don’t muddy HIS WORD with man made teachings.
there’s superstition surrounding your statues, which makes them idols. I bet you’d never toss one in the trash
What a perfect way to put it. If you give someone else the responsibility for your faith then you can't be held to account. It's probably why you don't see a lot of Bible study among them.
but as we all know, it comes down to individual responsibilty both in life and in worship
Yes, but isn't it beautiful to not only believe The Gospel, but to understand The Gospel. The more you read Scripture, the more you fellowship with other Christians the more you understand the incredible love of our Savior, Jesus Christ.
Okay... But how do you “wing” that request to her? Are you “petitioning” her? Now—differentiate how you “ask” Mary to do something, and how you “ask” God Almighty for something. What is the difference in the vehicle? I “ask” things of God daily; how is “asking” Mary different than praying??
As I’ve read here, she’s the supposed “Queen of Heaven”, so how do you get her attention????
Hint: you PRAY. I don’t care how the Roman Catholic Church “defines” it. Prayer is prayer; and if it’s directed to anyone other than God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), then you’re committing idolatry. And blasphemy because you’re ascribing abilities to a created creature that belongs to God ALONE.
Hoss
We've already got it. We already know that all history to you must be revised to prop up the Vatican's system. If necessary, to prop up the system, you would say that the Roman Catholic Church was in Britain in 300 B.C., because of the longing anticipation of the British to be Roman Catholic.
We already realize that you absolutely must revise all history to prop up the false notion that Jesus was creating a papacy in Matthew 16, and that a church as you want to believe exists there, actually exists there.
You even want to revise our words as we type them on this forum. We never said anything about what people in 100 A.D. called themselves. We are not concerned what they CALLED themselves.
We know that nice folks like you can't think any differently -- only what the Vatican says is truth, can be truth to you, even if they lie to you. So we are not first interested in changing your minds. We write firmly so that others will realize that the whole world need not succumb to the same mental traps.
Hey, other folks out there reading this, there are libraries, full---literal libraries of historical materials that have been written and compiled without either deference to the Roman Catholic Church or prejudice against the Roman Catholic Church. Read RCC-approved stuff. You're free to do so, and the comparison will help you understand some important things.
But histories, too, that were not written to prop up any religious system exist. The authors were not sitting around saying, "How can we destroy the views of the RCC." They were written by legitimate historians who were not bound to any church or its hierarchy to produce a product or create a particular mind set.
Don't simply swallow the Roman Catholic view of Roman, European, or American history. There is plenty of material out there.
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.