Posted on 09/25/2008 4:37:57 PM PDT by NYer
And BIBLICAL history must have stopped after the resurrection for Roman Catholics trusting in Mary, "Redemptrix"...as NO REFERENCE AT ALL to her is given in the rest of the New Testament (even in St. Peter's epistles!)....
One would think if Marian veneration were such an essential to Christianity, than Saints Paul, Peter, John, Jude, Dr. Luke (in Acts) would have ALL KINDS of references to her, in order to instruct the infant Church about someone of such high importance to them. But, in spite of instructing them about all kinds of things....NOTHING about Mary.
I wonder why?
The Archbishop of Canterbury also has devotion to actively homosexual priests and bishops. Not exactly a good witness to your side, eh?
** But, she is a person, nothing more. **
Good grief, brother. She is the Mother of God, the second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ. What IS your problem?
Bless the LORD, all creatures, everywhere in God’s domain. Bless the LORD, my soul! (Psalm 1-3:22)
Hmmmmm, it would seem from this verse, you could develop a theology to ask ants and amoeba and grizzly bears to “pray for us” since—if we take this with wooden literalism—then they must hear us....
Psalms are in the genre of poetry, and hence rightly use poetic license. Are they God’s holy Word, and true? Of course, but as they are....poetry, which uses readily apparent symbolic language. Trees as we know them don’t literally applaud, nor do mountains and hills form choirs, either... (Isa. 55:12, also a poetic passage).
Neither can one find support in holy Scripture for the idea that Christians in the presence of God in Heaven, share in his uniquely divine all-knowing and all-hearing attributes.
"Never apologize for the Blessed Virgin Mary!"
~~Mother Angelica
Isn't this the same prelate who is cool with the ordination of women and unrepentant sodomites? Hardly a man of sound judgment ...
Okie dokie then.
This was a serious doctrinal discussion but now it is apparent that you, with your large capital letters screaming at the screen, properly represent the legitimacy of other side. You’ve answered all my questions about Mary.
I'm not saying I agree with him on everything, or that this is even true, I was pointing out that he was not in Lourdes as a form of "protest."
Some seem to think that devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary is disavowed by ALL Protestants, that is not the case and it NEVER has been.
See what I wrote in #49.
Mother Angelica, who, the last time I visited her website, I saw devotedly kissing a STATUE of Mary. Idolatry?
I think we agree that Mary is now safely in the arms of her Bridegroom (meant as purely as that concept could be stated, not salaciously), and therefore she is now fully sanctified. Where do we find the need to have someone of higher ranking appeal to our Lord, if there is only One needing to intercede for me between man and God, the Man Christ Jesus? How does Mary actually improve that communication?
There is no need, per se, to go to someone other than the Lord. He is certainly above Mary - she leads to Him, but does not outrank him by any stretch of the imagination. That said, we know that the prayers of the especially holy are more effective - there isn't a need to ask them to help, but it isn't a bad idea!
And, does this mean that Mary is in some sense Omniscient or at least All-seeing? Does RCC tradition teach that the dead are in some sense sitting in a stadium watching the earth? What are their limitations? If you use the Hebrews text to support this (”...surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses...”), I have a grave disagreement that this broad interpretation fits the intention of the writer.
I don't pretend to know the relationship between the Kingdom of Heaven and Earth. Again, I go back to the "angels" point - if they could hear the Psalmist from Heaven, why can't those who are in Heaven due to the sacrifice of Christ?
Second, the S vs. s. You are the first RCC I have been in contact with that acknowledges that there is “s”. But, what I cannot catch, is whence cometh the need of “S”? This is not outlined anywhere I can find in Scriptures, so is this again a product of “tradition”?
Again, I don't believe there is a need to have "S"es, but, if you take the above seriously (intercession of the saints), then how do you know a person is in Heaven, and thus your petitions that they pray for you will be heard? Yes, I think this came from Holy Tradition - the early Martyrs were venerated by Christians, and that happened under the watchful eye of the first bishops.
I don't question that your organization has set a high bar, but that doesn't demonstrate that it is appropriate. The whole matter of elevating some via human observation does not seem appropriate. If the end result of these inquiries are simply, “Trust us, we are the final authority because we are the final authority.” then, I will respectfully disagree.
Well, sometimes, yes, you need to have faith in the Holy Spirit guiding the Church. But I think I can probably show the historical continuity throughout the history of the Church of this practice - while that may not be persuasive to you, I believe it demonstrates that He is protecting the practice.
I'll address your other post now...
Zenit uses some creative language, but, yes, we ask Mary to pray for the whole world. In the same way many people pray for world peace every sunday in their local churches; are we not asking them to put the world in their hands?
Read the thread yourself; it is on FR. This sounds an awful lot like a request for her to exercise her “power” over the world and influence the affairs of men directly. “Help us.” “Have pity on us.” I am now sensing that you led me down a rosy path. If you were not aware of this perspective as the official position, why did you tell me that this was the way you Catholics viewed Mary? If you did know it, then why smear the edges? Disappointed.
Please do not think I have ever tried to mislead you - in no way was that my intention. But, I must say, we relate to Mary as a mother, for if we are to become one with Christ, we must see her as our mother. In asking for her intercession, sometimes we ask her to take pity on us. I'm not sure how this is any different than what we've been discussing..?
Evidently the distinction is clear enough in the minds of the rest of the believing community to label this “mariolotry”. Mary is not your Mother, she was the woman selected to bear the physical manifestation of Jesus on earth. We are nowhere in the Scriptures directed to pray to her; on the contrary it is noted that there was a time when she was even snubbed by Jesus. Luke 8:20,21. The error of the RCC tradition continues to send the wwong message to its members and misstates the Gospel to the world.
Are we not brothers of Christ? Did Christ not give Mary to us, and us to her, in John 19:26? Further, your quoted Scripture - Luke 8:20-21 - explicitly says we are the family of Christ. Do you believe His true mother did not hear the word of God and act on it?
Further, do you consider Jesus' humanity and divinity seperate? If so, I'm afraid we were never on the same page to begin with.
Evidently the distinction is clear enough in the minds of the rest of the believing community to label this “mariolotry”.
The distinction is clear enough in the minds of the Protestant community - not the Orthodox or Anglican community. In fact, it is a small minority of Christians who do not give the Blessed Mother her due.
We are nowhere in the Scriptures directed to pray to her
Again, we are back on page one. I believe the instruction is there, especially when you read Scripture with the light of Holy Tradition. You don't.
The error of the RCC tradition continues to send the wwong message to its members and misstates the Gospel to the world.
Such is your opinion. It is a minority one in the Christian world, and throughout Christian history.
Certainly true that the “traditions” are not reliable when they teach another gospel than the Scriptures. Giving her what is “due” in your world view borders on blasphemy in my world. We will need to agree to disagree.
My view of the hypostatic union of the theanthropic person is intact and biblical. If the RCC elevates sinful men beyond decent respect (which I hold for Mary, Abraham, David, Peter, Paul, etc.) into Sainthood with a perverted sense of adoration, then I remind you to beware of idolatry.
Finally, I am not altogether sure we are brothers in Christ, if by that appellation you would require adherence to Rome's love of its manufactured traditions. Mary is a sinner saved by grace, like any Christian, and the ground is level at the foot of the cross.
From here in the Body of Christ, it appears as though the folks elevating people are round-aboutly elevating themselves.
Do you feel that way about the Mormons? Jehovah's Witnesses? Swedenborgians? Montanists? Gnostics? Marcionists?
Certainly true that the “traditions” are not reliable when they teach another gospel than the Scriptures.
But when the Scriptures are not clear on the matter, or silent, what shall we do? Tradition clarifies Scripture - they are two sides of the same Word, oral and written.
I am not altogether sure we are brothers in Christ
Anyone baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is a brother in Christ. you would require adherence to Rome's love of its manufactured traditions
Manufactured in your opinion.
Mary is a sinner saved by grace, like any Christian, and the ground is level at the foot of the cross.
Never said she wasn't saved by Grace. In fact, Gabriel recognized this - she was "full of Grace" from the get-go. Just because God bestowed His Grace on her ahead of time doesn't mean she was saved by it any less. And the ground in level in that we all need Grace, not beyond that.
From here in the Body of Christ, it appears as though the folks elevating people are round-aboutly elevating themselves.
Must be nice to have that vantage point. May God have mercy on me, a sinner.
Thank you for noting that distinction, one which certainly was made also by the good Cardinal.
One of the best ways to begin with understanding Luther's view of Mary is Luther’s Marian hymn, completed A.D. 1545, one year before his death.
Luther scholars frequently—generally correctly—differentiate between “young, Catholic Luther” and “old, Protestant Luther”. Well, here is “old Protestant Luther, some 28 years after posting the 95 Theses sounding very Catholic indeed:
To me she's dear, the worthy maid,
And I cannot forget her;
Praise, honor, virtue her are said,
Then all will love her better.
I seek her good,
And if I should
Right evil fare,
I do not care,
She'll make up for it to me
With love and truth that will not tire,
Which she will ever show me,
And do all my desire.
She wears of purest gold a crown
Twelve stars their rays are twining,
Her rainment, glorious as the sun,
And bright from far is shining.
Her feet the moon
Are set upon
She is the bride
With the Lord to hide.
Sore travail is upon her;
She bringest forth a noble Son
Whom all the world must honor,
Their king, the only one.
That makes the dragon rage and roar,
He will the child upswallow;
His raging comes to nothing more;
No jot of gain will follow.
The infant high
Up to the sky
Away is heft
And he is left
On earth,all mad with murder.
The mother now alone is she,
But God will watchful guard her.
And the right Father he.
Obviously the term "Protestant" indicates that the adherents were protesting CERTAIN practices and beliefs of the Catholic Church and as the Reformation advanced Reformers added to the list of tenets they were protesting. However, it must be noted that most of the major tenets of Catholicism (the Incarnation, the Divinity of Jesus Christ, the Resurrection and Ascension, the Trinity etc.) were NEVER questioned (though I have recently come across some non-Mormon Christian FReepers who disavow the Trinity).
As best I can tell, Protestant problems with Catholic Marian teachings were almost nonexistent until the Immaculate Conception was made dogma in the mid-19th Century and much of this is based upon total misconception of what the Immaculate Conception actually is.
Precisely. As an example consider the Confession of Augburg, adopted 1530, in which 21 of the 30 articles pertain to matters of agreement, including Sin, Justification, Good Works, and the Sacraments.
As best I can tell, Protestant problems with Catholic Marian teachings were almost nonexistent until the Immaculate Conception was made dogma in the mid-19th Century and much of this is based upon total misconception of what the Immaculate Conception actually is
The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception places the focus squarely on the sacrifice of Christ and states that only this merit is what preserved the Blessed Mother from original sin--nothing that she did to earn or deserve this.
How much more Lutheran can you get? ;-)
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.