Is Prayer/Veneration/Worship to Mary Biblical?

self | 12-14-14 | ealgeone

[ealgeone]

The reason for this article is to determine if the worship/veneration given to Mary by the catholic church is justified from a Biblical perspective. This will be evaluated using the Biblical standard and not man’s standard.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

MDO,
Hi FRiend.

Not baptist. Never was.

I’ve written about it so many times, that I got tired of it.

Now, I write about Christ, about salvation through His gift alone. About the assurance of eternal life in Scripture. And to correct error.

I wish every person to know Him and the richness of salvation in Him. It doesn’t matter to me where anyone goes to Church. It isn’t about a denomination. It is always about Him.

blessings in ‘15

[Mrs. Don-o]

Sorry for any confusion.

#5181 was meant for you, SR.

This forum has become more than a little confusing to my brain. Thank you for your patience for an old lady!

[aMorePerfectUnion]

In Mrs. Don-o’s defense, the Religion Forum causes us all to speak and hedge our words when referring to other FReepers, in order to stay within the guidelines of not making it personal.

I would take it as her good-natured self, playing within the rules and trying not to give offense.

If she says it about Scripture, then bust her! (just kidding :-)

AMPU

[Mrs. Don-o]

You seem to be conflating disciplines with dogmas. It's a very easy mistake to make, and I can tell you for a fact that Catholics do it all the time. The validity of elections and so forth is a matter of canon law. That can change. It is not a doctrine of the Church.

If this present Pope wanted his successor to be chosen by taking a name out of a hat, he could do that and what would change is electoral practice, not a doctrine of the Faith.

Dogmas, properly called such, are very few and very firm.

[metmom]

Well said.

No male has authority over me by virtue of the fact of his maleness. That does not by default grant him that authority, nor does it give him the right to use Scripture as a bludgeon with which to force me into submission to him.

Paul tells women to submit to their OWN HUSBANDS. Sine af vet is (thankfully) not my husband, I am under NO obligation to obey his dictates, even when he tries to misuse Scripture to demand it.

Nor do I fall for the tactic of *Oh no! Someone quoted Scripture at me. Now I have to obey it because I adhere to the sufficiency of Scripture(or sola Scriptura if you will)*.

Nor are any of us FR ladies claiming authority over any men here. Paul’s admonition was for women having authority or teaching position. Nevertheless, women in the NT were evangelistic and were prophetesses.

If someone considers what I am posting as *teaching* them, then perhaps they’d better re-evaluate their own knowledge of Scripture and learn themselves so they are not in a position of feeling like they are being taught something.

It would be nice if more men took on themselves the role of spiritual responsibility they are supposed to fulfill.

And of course, FR is NOT a church, so that admonition by Paul does not apply.

[metmom]

Call no man father Matthew 23: 8-10 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ.

[CynicalBear]

>>At some point or another, the Protestants pleads: "Please stop reading this passage.<<

Please show where any Protestant has said that.

[metmom]

>>>FOR ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD”..He didn’t really mean it....Can you believe that???...<<<

tc: did Jesus say that???

The Holy spirit did.

Same difference.

Romans 3:23

[metmom]

Amen, sister.

What you said.

[metmom]

If women are not to have authority over men, then what’s with the Mary, Queen of Heaven stuff?

You need to get her off that pedestal, then.

Can’t have any women over men, telling them what to do like y’all claim Mary does to Jesus.

[Mrs. Don-o]

These are beautiful and intriguing thoughts.

"Now it makes perfect sense at Cana when he said Ma li v'lach ? It was a tender question in a bond of holy love between mother and son; What is there between you and me ? Love, trust, faith until death and beyond. What can I do for you ? "

I never heard this interpretation of the phrase "Ma li v'lach?" I'd always heard it was an expression of, at best, uninvolvement ("What's it to you or me?") Can you explain this a little further?

Thanks for these good musings.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks. We (I include myself inm that "we"!) do well to remember that sometimes we don't understand others, or they don't understand us, not because of stupidity or obstinacy, but because they and we really don't have that shared context.

I'm becoming more aware of the way key words are like live links, hypertexts, which some of our readers automatically click and "get," and some don't. That happened to me just recently.

Assume good will!

[Mrs. Don-o]

There's no question the bodies of the OT faithful departed (OK, with the possible exception of Enoch, Melchizedek, and Elijah) are rotting/have rotted into the ground. Dead, dead.

Jesus could nevertheless talk with Moses and Elijah on Mt. Tabor --- Peter, James, and John heard and saw them --- and Jesus refer to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as "living."

Several different sense of the word.

[Mark17]

Our time 10:34AM to you is minus 11 hrs from Filipino time. I have been thinking about minus 13, but that was figuring on Japan, which is minus 13. But that was when I often had to call our offices in Tokyo, just across the street from the Hotel Okura. I guess one cannot judge this, looking at a Mercator projection(?)

Mercator schmercator. I just use my iPhone to tell me what time it is in other parts of the world. 😄

[Mrs. Don-o]

That's exactly my point, dear Cynical Bear, and that's why I state these, not as facts nor even as assumptions, but as I said, wild guesses.

I did NOT base any beliefs on them. On that key point, you are incorrect.

We were discussing St. Paul's precepts at 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2 that women should not preach, teach, ask questions in public, or exercise leadership, at least under some circumstances. Nobody has given me, on this thread, an explanation of what their belief is today. Do Paul's limits on women, limit today's Christian woman from all preaching, teaching, and leadership, or not? Or to what extent?

I can't speak of YOUR beliefs, CynicalBear, or metmom's, or anybody else's, because you have not told me what you believe on this score, or what your teachers teach on it.

So, reasonably, I am using tentative language to say "may" or "might" of "if that's the case."

So I will put the question to you directly. Do you think Paul's precepts to the Corinthians and to Timothy mean:

• Women should not have any pastoral position.

  ~OR~

• Women are not to be preachers, i.e. at the pulpit, but it may be OK for them to be public speakers an another venue.

  ~OR~

• Women are not to be preachers, but may exercise other pastoral roles.

  ~OR~

• women can't teach by speaking, but it's OK if they teach by writing.

  ~OR~

• Women are forbidden to each adult men in any church venue (e.g. an adult study class.)

  ~OR~

• Women may not teach men in seminaries.

  ~OR~

• Women may not exercise any leadership role whatsoever.

  ~OR~

• A woman may not be head of anything, not even a committee, if that puts a man in a non-leading position.

  ~OR~

• Paul's precepts in this case are limited to his particular place, time, and churches. The churches need not observe this anymore.

• ~OR~

• Is there some other possibility I forgot?

So you see, I did not presume to know what your (various) answer(s) would be. I was very careful NOT to impute to you a position which you do not hold.

So, CynicalBear, metmom, boatbums, mitch5501, Mark17--- educate me. What limits on women are to be observed because of what Paul said in the cited passages?

[HiTech RedNeck]

Lots of touchy issues here. How to deal with them without gratuitously clunking around in army boots.

[Mrs. Don-o]

That's what I thought you'd say.

;oD

Peace!

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you for assuming me to innocent before proven guilty, aMPU! May I always follow your good example!

I'm not sure that the Religion Forum "don't make it personal" rule implies concealing one's own ties to the Body of Christ (call it "church" or "denomination" or "reformed heritage" or "evangelical fellowship" or "my prayer group" or what-you-will.)

Let me use this as an example. Marine life forms called zooplankton live in the ocean by the bazillions, but all as single cells. They do not, like sponges and corals, form clumps or structures which include any degree of cell differentiation. They do not adhere to a shared life as even a rudimentary multicellular organism. They have no living, effective contact with each other which would contribute to a vital unity.

Another marine life form,the Blue Whale, comprises 60 quadrillion - 100 quadrillion cells (I just looked it up) and they are organized into tissues, organs and systems which are differentiated as to physiological function, and depend upon each other for overall well-being of the one animal they are, a Blue Whale.

If one were to say "I am just a single-cell Christian" and "I don't need any others," it would be a self-contradiction, because St. Paul says we are more like the Blue Whale than like the zooplankton. We are feet, hands, eyes, noses, and ears of one Living Thing.

1 Corinthians 12:20-21
But now indeed there are many members, yet one body.
And the eye cannot say to the hand,
"I have no need of you";
nor again the head to the feet,
"I have no need of you."

He teaches this a lot: Romans 12:5,1 Corinthians 12:12-27, Ephesians 3:6 and 5:23, Colossians 1:18 and 1:24.

So when a person says, or seems to say, that their connection to other Christians really doesn't matter, and they flick off "church" (or "denomination" or "reformed heritage" or "evangelical fellowship" or what-you-will) as if that's quite beside the point, as if it really doesn't amount to much, it's one of those things that makes me go, "Huh???..."

Can one take the Body of Christ and dissolve it into a vast soupy patch of zooplankton?

I hope this analogy will be taken for whatever small soupy sense it makes!

"About Jesus Christ and the Church, I simply know they're just one thing, and we shouldn't complicate the matter." - St. Joan of Arc

[CynicalBear]

>>Nobody has given me, on this thread, an explanation of what their belief is today.<<

Sure they have. Multiple times. This is not the "church" and nothing in scripture denies a woman the right to quote scripture. If you find anywhere in scripture that denies a woman to stand up for what scripture teaches let us know. Not one of the woman here is attempting to exert authority over a man that I have found. If you have let us know.

Those who are trying to silence the women here love to bring up Paul's words to Timothy but I don't see them applying what is also included there. Do they also demand that women not braid their hair? How about wearing any jewellery? No gold or pearls worn by Catholic women? How about costly garments? Do Catholic women remain quiet?

Romans 16:11 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.

Phoebe a deacon? Say it ain't so.

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

Was Peter talking to just the men? If you think so would you please show the source?

Titus 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

Women should teach? Do Catholic women also all stay at home?

The only restriction Paul gives is that women should not have spiritual authority over the man. Those here who would like to wield Paul's letters to silence women had better head to the other words of Paul regarding women as well. Their women had better not fix their hair, or wear jewelery, or pearls, or nice dresses. They need to keep their women home and not out working. If they think Paul was saying women should at all time shut up they had better heed the rest of his words also. If not all I see is hypocrisy.

[metmom]

You know what?

In general, I am pre-trib, but I don’t worry much about it because what’s going to happen is what’s going to happen and what I believe in it isn’t going to affect that.

I figure that I need to be ready at all times to meet the Lord on any given day.

We don’t know when our time on earth is up and how that will work out, so the best thing to do is to keep current accounts with Him and be found in Him at all times.