Posted on 12/08/2012 2:24:39 PM PST by NYer
Do Catholics worship Mary? This question is as old as the Protestant Reformation itself, and it rests, like other disputed doctrinal points, on a false premise that has been turned into a wedge: the veneration of Mary detracts from the worship of Christ.
This seeming opposition between Mary and Christ is symptomatic of the Protestant tendency, begun by Luther, to view the entirety of Christian life through a dialectical lens – a lens of conflict and division. With the Reformation the integrity of Christianity is broken and its formerly coherent elements are now set in opposition. The Gospel versus the Law. Faith versus Works. Scripture versus Tradition. Authority versus Individuality. Faith versus Reason. Christ versus Mary.
The Catholic tradition rightly sees the mutual complementarity of these elements of the faith, as they all contribute to our ultimate end – living with God now and in eternity. To choose any one of these is to choose them all.
By contrast, to assert that Catholics worship Mary along with or in place of Christ, or that praying to Mary somehow impedes Christ’s role as “the one mediator between God and men” (1 Tim 2:5) is to create a false dichotomy between the Word made flesh and the woman who gave the Word his flesh. No such opposition exists. The one Mediator entrusted his mediation to the will and womb of Mary. She does not impede his mediation – she helps to make it possible.
Within this context we see the ancillary role that the ancilla Domini plays in her divine Son’s mission. Mary’s is not a surrogate womb rented and then forgotten in God’s plan. She is physically connected to Christ and his life, and because of this she is even more deeply connected to him in the order of grace. She is, in fact, “full of grace,” as only one who is redeemed by Christ could be.
The feast of Mary’s Immaculate Conception celebrates the very first act of salvation by Christ in the world. Redemption is made possible for all by his precious blood shed on the cross. Yet Mary’s role in the Savior’s life and mission is so critical and so unique that God saw it necessary to wash her in the blood of the Lamb in advance, at the first moment of her conception.
This reality could not be more Biblical: the angel greets Mary as “full of grace” (Luke 1:28), which is literally rendered as “already graced” (kecharitōmenē). Following Mary, the Church has “pondered what sort of greeting this might be” for centuries. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, ultimately defined in 1854, is nothing other than a rational expression of the angel’s greeting contained in Scripture: Mary is “already graced” with Christ’s redemption at the very moment of her creation.
Because God called Mary to the unique vocation of serving as the Mother of God, it is not just her soul that is graced, as is the case for us when we receive the sacraments. Mary’s entire being, body and soul, is full of grace so that she may be a worthy ark for the New Covenant. And just as the ark of the old covenant was adorned with gold to be a worthy house for God’s word, Mary is conceived without original sin to be the living and holy house for God’s Word.
Thus Mary is not only conceived immaculately, that is, without stain of sin. She also is the Immaculate Conception. Her entire being was specifically created by God with unique privilege so that she could fulfill her role in God’s plan of salvation. “Free from sin,” both original and personal, is the necessary consequence of being “full of grace.”
Protestants claim that veneration of Mary as it is practiced by Catholics is not biblical. St. Paul encouraged the Corinthians to “be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). Paul is not holding himself up as the end goal, but as a means to Christ, the true end. And if a person is imitated, he is simultaneously venerated.
If we should imitate Paul, how much more should we imitate Mary, who fulfilled God’s will to the greatest degree a human being could. Throughout her life she humbled herself so that God could be exalted, and because of this, Christ has fulfilled his promise by exalting his lowly mother to the seat closest to him in God’s kingdom.
Mary is the model of humility, charity, and openness to the will of God. She allows a sword to pierce her heart for the sake of the world’s salvation. She shows us the greatness to which we are called: a life free from sin and filled with God’s grace that leads to union with God in Heaven. She is the model disciple, and therefore worthy of imitation and veneration, not as an end in herself, but as the means to the very purpose of her – and our – existence: Christ himself.
God’s lowly handmaiden would not want it any other way.
At times it’s best to stay with things you know. It’s rather evident to me at least again in this instance that scripture is not one of them.
>>A bronze snake would be a graven image and pagan yet God Told Moses that people who look upon it would be healed of snake bites<<
2 Kings 18:4 - He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles. He broke into pieces the bronze snake Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it. You see, the Israelites had done the same thing with the bronze snake that Catholics do. But apparently you didn’t know that or you wouldn’t have asked that question.
That answer to your question is NO I don’t “carry around a bronze snake” because God condemned the practice.
I won’t trust my service to and worship of God to “apparent” or “probable”. I diligently seek what God said.
I can assure you that contention does not come from scripture and you may have deduced by now that my beliefs are based in scripture and not in “people you have encountered”.
In that vein of thought the RCC has this in their Catechism.
# 841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”[330]
Do you serve the same God as the Muslims?
Oof. Sorry for that. As I am 50 and still coming out of a long illness, I know how things go when they don't go as planned... Too young to quit, too hammered to work... But, perhaps this is an opportunity to try a little entrepreneurship. eh? My friend started a janitorial business at 55 and is doing better now than he ever did working for someone.
Why place confidence in tradition? St Paul told Timothy to commit the message to other faithful men who would then pass it to other faithful men. The epistle of Jude speaks of the faith once delivered to the saints. .
I am with you that far, but oral tradition cannot change what came before it. I mean, it is technically an impossibility, or one makes YHWH a liar.
But, perhaps what I mean by tradition is not what you are denouncing. If your beef is with the Roman Church, I cannot enter into that - I am an Orthodox Christian - surely a poor example of one, for sure.
I know you are Orthodox (and that the Missus is RCC) - Some time ago, we had quite a chat... As for being poor about it, humble things are always the best! : ) While I find the Orthodox to be way more palatable than the RCC, I am still a country mile away from where you are... But I can see you from here (*waves*).
As for tradition, I am particularly against the Roman church, but yours, Judaism's, and even my Protestant brethren's traditions are also needful to examine - We are to inspect for leaven once a year (Passover) - And I think that is healthy in every case.
My journey to Holy Orthodoxy made me grapple with the question of the origins of the church, if such could be found. I began as pretty much a Baptist successionist, I suppose. I thought "The Trail of Blood" pretty much summed it up. Don't believe that anymore.
I am not particularly endorsing the 'trail of blood' as per the Baptists, But I do think I am pretty close to where they are... There is something there - something that was distributed by very humble means...
The epistles of St Ignatius rocked my world - especially his words on the Holy Mysteries (Eucharist) and the role of the Bishop. He was martyred - eaten by lions - rather than renounce around 67 A.D. I found a church that counts him in their number.
I am not very swayed by church fathers - I view them largely as a contrivance rife with inclusions and outright frogeries (no offense intended) My problem is that the closer one tries to push a liturgical church, (complete with hierarchies resembling, if not outright mimicking pagan mystery religions) toward what was undoubtedly a Torah compliant sect of Judaism, the more ludicrous it becomes.
This pagan-laced monstrosity cannot have come from Yeshua (else he is a false prophet and teacher), and the closer one puts these pagan influences to the original Assembly, the more it emphasizes the fact that it cannot be what He laid down.
For instance, Baptism as it comes down to us is reminiscent of pagan baptisms (take your pick), whereas what we should be understanding is the thing that YHWH set as an example: The Hebrew Mikvah.
The same can be said of the Eucharist, which may as well have sprung complete right out of Mithras. It's very meaning is a far cry from the demonstration of the rite as performed by Melchizedek.
The thing is, The things of YHWH are all defined in the Torah, and in the Old Testament, and those things CANNOT be changed (added to, or taken away from). and I cannot believe for even an instant that Yeshua came to make His Father out to be a liar. Ergo, I am with you on the things that fit in that setting... The rest, I am adamantly against.
But, again, I do not know that this holds any weight for you. Are you a Son of Noah - a righteous gentile? I know only a little of that. I heard Vendyl Jones speak once and was on his mailing list for a time.
Nope. Christian Reform by upbringing, and Presbyterian OPC by association. But if studying prophecy and history as a Christian, inevitably the things of God intervene... So I am far afield compared to many of my fellows, but then I have always preferred the green pastures to the pens.
Like playing piano by ear?
I don't have to bet, I'm certain The Holy Spirit lead them back to Catholicism
If Catholics resent the Inquisition, depravity of their popes, terrible misuse of indulgences, oppression and murder
Whatever someone did in the name of Catholicism that was contrary to dogmatic teaching did not represent Catholicism, be it a Pope , Bishop or Lay person. Our faith is "concrete". Those who choose not to follow correctly excommunicate themselves Latae Sententiae
Protestantism has no dogmatic teaching so there is nothing to adhere to other than the many self interpretations of what each person believes about faith and morals
You have the good and the bad just like we do, but you have no concrete rules on many issues such as abortion, contraception , etc...
It's just too bad that the simple MESSAGE got all cluttered with things that are not important at all.
Much like the parlor game where a story is told from one person to the next.
Obviously that trumps what God said for some people.
Can you imagine the hubris? That sense of power is exactly what I was talking about - NO ONE can make holy (sanctify) what YHWH has said is an abomination. And that very thing, before any other, should be a whoppin' big clue to everyone.
“” 841 regarding Muslims””
Do you believe a Muslim women who loves unconditionally and has never heard of Christ because she is not allowed to by Mullahs is going to be in hell? A merciful God does not send those who love unconditionally to hell.
Do you also think all Muslim babies that die go to hell?
How about the courtesy of answering the question I asked rather than ask a question?
Now ,answer the question if you think innocent muslim babies and unconditional loving muslims who have never heard of Christ are going to hell according to what you believe?
>> Now ,answer the question if you think innocent muslim babies and unconditional loving muslims who have never heard of Christ are going to hell according to what you believe?<<
First of all to even ask that question is an indication of a lack of understanding of the simple message of the gospel. Acts 16:31 “Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved – and your house”. The converse would also be true wouldn’t it. “Don’t believe on the Lord Jesus and you will not be saved – or your house”. It’s pretty cut and dried. Humans are born in a depraved sinful condition and will parish unless they are covered by the blood of Jesus which those who do not “believe” are not nor are their offspring until the age of reason at which time they also need to “believe on the Lord Jesus”.
We know. This is why I asked, why what we do can glorify God but cannot advance our salvation, and why is it that we don't have an obligation to that end.
He is RISEN!
We know. You don't have to tell us. Indeed He is risen!
If it’s just a habit, I’ll ignore it next time. I only commented because prior to your exercise of your habit we seemed to discuss the very same scripture.
Your statement is obviously made in ignorance. One cannot study the prophecies of Islam and conclude the same 'god' as YHWH authored them. They diametrically oppose the prophecies of YHWH.
Muhammad's 'god' is emphatically *not* YHWH.
Which means you don't believe in the God of Abraham
“Don’t believe on the Lord Jesus and you will not be saved – or your house”. It’s pretty cut and dried.
So according to you, if a muslim women who loves unconditionally gives up her life to save her baby from a terrorist ends up in hell even though she has never heard of Christ . This would mean Christ creates people for the purpose of hell according to your belief.
So much for the God of mercy according to your belief , you have a blood thirsty God sacrificing loving people to the devil
Perhaps, but Moses made that at God's command. It was not something he decided to do himself.
Numbers 21:6-9 6 Then the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died. 7 And the people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord and against you. Pray to the Lord, that he take away the serpents from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. 8 And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent and set it on a pole, and everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.
That bronze serpent had an interesting end.
2 Kings 18:1-7 18 In the third year of Hoshea son of Elah, king of Israel, Hezekiah the son of Ahaz, king of Judah, began to reign. 2 He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Abi the daughter of Zechariah. 3 And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, according to all that David his father had done.
4 He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan). 5 He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him. 6 For he held fast to the Lord. He did not depart from following him, but kept the commandments that the Lord commanded Moses. 7 And the Lord was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered.
Thanks for reaffirming the point I made earlier today- That God owns things made from nature and the pagans have NO claim of anything.
“”Your statement is obviously made in ignorance””
Until you can articulate, it is you who is ignorant.
I’m retiring to watch football for the night
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.