Catholic Without Marian Dogma?

[Lenten_ashes]

That sounds like the school I went to. They wouldnt even allow the teachers to use textbooks that had quotes from bible translations that werent the KJV. And they fed us so much misinformation about the Church, science, and ignored or mocked anything that conflicted with their beliefs. Thankfully their misinformation only made me more curious and inquisitive about the Church. So their plan to turn me into a fundamental baptist completely backfired.

I hear that so much from the Baptists that I grew up around and live around. One of my friends and his parents believe that the translators of the NKJV were punished by God and that all other translations are works of the Devil. His mother even believes Latin is the language of the Devil.

Yeah, KJV-only does seem rather cultish to me, but that is ridiculous.

If you are Catholic now you must take a real beating when you are around these people.

 

[guanophore]

It is difficult for me to accept them as necessary to the faith (i.e. MUST be accepted or you throw out everything else).

Thank you

This is a very important point. For Catholics, the Faith is One. It s a seamless garment that cannot be rent. If one begins to unravel certain threads, the integrity of the garment will be lost. This is what happened during the Reformation, and since that time, when people pick and choose which parts of the Apostolic faith they will reject. It causes disintegration and fragmentation in the Body of Christ.

 

[sudy]

To acknowledge that we don’t understand something fully is absolutely fine, but ultimately, to deny doctrine is not compatible with Catholicism as the Church has declared them to be divinely revealed. There are no loopholes.

This is a very important point. For Catholics, the Faith is One. It s a seamless garment that cannot be rent. If one begins to unravel certain threads, the integrity of the garment will be lost. This is what happened during the Reformation, and since that time, when people pick and choose which parts of the Apostolic faith they will reject. It causes disintegration and fragmentation in the Body of Christ.

This ^

 

[sudy]

My time limit expired to edit the above what I wanted to add was that I apologise that my comment seems hard line. Of course I understand that you’re looking for answers to your questions.

 

[Goya]

One no and one yes. Hmm.

For the record, I have been a Christian for 40 years. I have been studying Catholicism seriously for over five. I have read about every apologetic work there is. I have read the best Catholic theologians and Biblical scholars (like Raymond Brown). I’ve watched every video Bp. Barron has ever made. I’ve read every book by Scott Hahn. I regularly read Jimmy Akin et al. I’ve watched about every video from Catholic Answers. I’ve actually taught some Catholics things they didn’t know about their own faith. I have attended a few different Catholic churches (no Eucharist of course).

But the Marian dogmas are hanging me up.

So, do I become a Catholic and see if they ever make sense to me. Or do I remain a Protestant sympathetic to Catholicism? Do I continue doing all things Catholic (Mass, Liturgy of the Hours, etc.) but refrain from the Eucharist forever?

Like I said, so far there’s one vote for no and one for yes. Is there a consensus or reference to an “official” answer?

Thank you

I’ll offer you my humble $.02., for whatever it may be of use–fully inviting any whose views conflict with mine here, to speak freely to expose the err of my ways.

What you need to do wrt to the Marian dogmas, is to ‘assent’ to them.

Practically speaking, that amounts to deferring to the Church on those counts.

You may not intellectually accept the Marian dogmas, internally–you’d hardly be the first–but as long as you keep it internal (certainly don’t go about publicly preaching that the Church has it all wrong about Mary, while pretending to be, or holding yourself out as, Catholic)–pray in earnest for the graces of Faith, respect and support the Church’s authority, and live the Faith…IMO, you may be as fully Catholic as any one else.

Additionally, pray for the light of Truth; pray for the graces of the Holy Spirit to enlighten your soul; surrender your free will to God.

IMHO, as you do these things, the Holy Spirit will actually lead you to Mary–who in turn, inevitably, leads you to Christ (hence the age old adage, “…to Jesus, through Mary”).

When you witness this special role of Mary, the dogmas will make perfect sense; they will feel as perfect, as truth itself. (Not by accident).

…and to make those waters just a tad more inviting, I offer you a list of ppl. who loved Our Lady profoundly, openly:

–St. Joseph (her earthly spouse)
–St. John, the beloved Apostle (aka the Evangelist), to whom she was entrusted at the foot of the cross.
–St. Polycarp (protege of St. John the Apostle)
–St. Ireneaus (pretege of St. Polycarp)
–St. Cyril of Jerusalem
–St. Jerome (transcribed the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate) b/t 382-405 AD)
–St. Ambrose
–St. Augustine of Hippo (father of Western Christianity)
–St. Thomas Aquinas (“the Angelic Doctor”, Doctor of the Church)
–St. Dominic (credited with the modern Rosary)
–St. Francis of Assisi
–St. Basil
–St. Teresa of Avila (i.e. “Big Teresa” (vs. “lil’ Therese”), Doctor of the Church)
–St. John of the Cross (Doctor of the Church (author of “The Dark Night”))
–St. Thomas Moore
–St. Therese of Lisseux (“the Little Flower”/(“Little Therese”) Doctor of the Church)
–Saint Louis Marie de Montfort
–St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori (Doctor of the Church)
–[St.] Sister Faustina (Divine Mercy)
–Saint Maximilian Kolbe
–St. Josemaria Escriva (founder of Opus Dei)
–Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (Doctor of the Church)
–St. John Vianney
–St. Francis de Sales
–St. Ildephonsus, Bishop
–St. John Damascene
–St. Germanus of Constantinople, Patriarch of Constantinople
–Pope Saint Gregory VII
–St. Anselm, Archbishop and Doctor of the Church
–St. Bonaventure, Cardinal-Bishop and Doctor of the Church
–St. Cajetan, Founder of the Theatines
–St. Francis Borgia
–St. Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal-Bishop and Doctor of the Church
–St. John Eudes
–Blessed William Joseph Chaminade
–Pope Pius XII, 1876-1958 AD
–Saint Hilary of Poitiers - Bishop, Father, and Doctor of the Church
–Saint Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church
–Saint Gregory Nazianzen, Father and Doctor of the Church
–Saint John Damascene, Father and Doctor of the Church
–Blessed Cardinal John Henry Newman
–St. Clare ('Poor Clares)
–St. Rose of Lima
–St. Joan of Arc
–St. Elizabeth Ann Seton
–St. Bernadette of Lourdes (as in visionary/“Our Lady of Lourdes”)
–[St.] Padre Pio
–Pope Saint Pius X
–Pope Paul VI
–Blessed Mother Theresa of Calcutta (the 3rd of the Carmelite Theresan Triumvirate).
–Pope John Paul II, the Great (i.e.–Saint…)
–Pope Benedict XVI
–Pope Francis

I offer this list for the primary purpose of showing that if these ppl. were not only NOT adversely effected by their Marian devotion–but clearly, undeniably, incredibly, helped immeasurably by Our Lady–as she herself said: “…[her] soul amplifies the Lord”–then surely she is not only one not to be feared, but to be embraced.

Or, to paraphrase the words of the “Angel of God” to St. Joseph (in Mt 1:20), and of Christ to St. John (in John 19:26-27) at the foot of the cross:

Do not be afraid to take Mary as your Mother. :harp:

fwiw/jmho. :twocents:

 

[Wesrock]

auctoris, what would you say the Marian dogmas demonstrate about Christ and the kingdom?

 

[AveOTheotokos]

Auctoris, While I am no scholar, theologian or great apologist, I pray that by sharing my understanding of things and through the work of the Holy Spirit, your mind will be put to ease and you may come to embrace all that is our Mother Mary.

I shall begin with a short prayer:

“Come Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and kindle in them the fire of your love. Send forth your Spirit, and they shall be created. And You shall renew the face of the earth.”

Amen.

And now to my humble understanding of things:

Original Sin left humanity wounded. Through baptism, we are absolved of this sin but the wounded nature of humanity remains with us. While our “injuries” are treated through the sacraments of baptism and reconciliation, we are prone to “re-injury” due to the lasting effects of the original wound of Original Sin.

Mary was conceived without Original Sin to protect her from this wounded nature and propensity to “re-injure” ourselves and our relationship with God. Had she not been protected from this, she possibly would have not been a perfect, sinless vessel for our Lord. Her wounded human nature would have opened her up to the possibility of being in a state of sin before, during, and after the incarnation.

If Mary had only been sinless at birth, she might have sinned between the time of her birth and the time of the conception of Jesus. This would result in Jesus receiving a flawed, sinful, and imperfect human nature. Also consider what the effect might be (as we don’t know for certain) if Mary were to sin while Jesus was in the womb, or was to nurse from a sinful woman, or faced temptation to sin from exposure to his own mother’s example… Mary’s role as the mother, nurturer, and caretaker of the “God made Man” requires this pure, sinless nature.

Because of this, we can reason that Mary was conceived without the stain of Original Sin, and was “full of grace” to help her to avoid falling into sin any time before the conception. It is also logical that after the birth of Jesus, God would not withdraw these graces from someone who had already dedicated their life to being the “handmaid of the Lord”.

Being God’s only creation that was:

1.) Conceived without original sin,

2.) filled with grace

3.)Fully chose of her own free will God and his plan

It can be said that she is the most perfect creation (remember Jesus was not a creation, but was “Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all age”).

It is also logical that she would be assumed into heaven so that her sinless body and soul would not be touched by the corruption, decay, and pains of death… In Romans 6:23, we see it said that “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Unlike the rest of humanity, since Mary was never touched by sin, her soul and body wouldn’t require purification to be in the presence of God, especially since she had already been in the presence of God for her entire life from the moment the angel announced to her “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” as we see in Luke 1:28

These beliefs have been around since the early church but there was no need to dogmatically proclaim them until after the protestant revolution. Dogmatic proclamations arise in the face of heresies and the need to clarify truth for followers to avoid confusion and the spread of heretical concepts.

The Marian Dogmas are not necessary just “because the church says so” but rather “because some are spreading falsities that are causing misunderstandings of truths and we are clarifying these truths to protect the faithful’s understanding of God”. They are necessary because not believing in them detracts from our understanding of the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

And to close in prayer:

“O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you, and for all who do not have recourse to you, especially the enemies of the Church and those recommended to you.”

“Lord, Jesus Christ, have mercy on me, a sinner.”

Amen.

 

[Della]

I can see nothing to challenge and everything to say to in your post, Goya.

Indeed, when I was struggling with belief in Mary, I took the giant leap of simply asking for her help. I prayed the rosary, hoping that it was all right to do, and that God would understand if I was wrong to do it. I can only offer, from that experiment, my own experience, but I found a gracious friend and mentor in Our Lady. God wasn’t offended, far from it. Mary guided me and helped me draw closer to Jesus than I ever thought possible. She’s an ally, not an enemy to our faith, since her whole life, on earth and now in heaven, was and is directed toward her Son and bringing people to faith in him.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I can see nothing to challenge and everything to say to in your post, Goya.

Indeed, when I was struggling with belief in Mary, I took the giant leap of simply asking for her help. I prayed the rosary, hoping that it was all right to do, and that God would understand if I was wrong to do it. I can only offer, from that experiment, my own experience, but I found a gracious friend and mentor in Our Lady. God wasn’t offended, far from it. Mary guided me and helped me draw closer to Jesus than I ever thought possible. She’s an ally, not an enemy to our faith, since her whole life, on earth and now in heaven, was and is directed toward her Son and bringing people to faith in him.

I second that.

She is such a powerful intercessor for us.

Even the Marian apparitions which TBH totally repulsed me as a protestant, now make much more sense in the overall grand scheme of things. Just look at the transformation of Mexico which was totally pagan until our Lady of Guadalupe appears. Now it’s 93% Christian.

 

[auctoris]

What you need to do wrt to the Marian dogmas, is to ‘assent’ to them.

Thank you. That is helpful. I understand that you can say if the Catholic Church teaches it as dogma, then I’m going to assume it’s true. Of course that doesn’t mean I have to start Marian devotions. I just accept that the Church is correct on such matters.

Thanks

 

[auctoris]

when I was struggling with belief in Mary . . .

I know what you are saying, but from an outside perspective, it seems that “belief in Mary” is only relevant for two reasons. 1. She was the Mother of God and that relates something about Jesus’s divine nature. The IC does to some degree as well. Her having a sinless life doesn’t necessarily relate to Jesus. And the assumption really follows from all the others. 2. Believing in Mary is faith in the Church that it is correct about the Marian dogmas.

It is very difficult for Protestants to accept that “belief in” ANY human other than Jesus is ultimately relevant for salvation and the Christian life. The feeling they get is that if there was more than one sinless person, then the sinlessness of Jesus is diminished. I know the answers and response to that, I’m just relaying how it can seem to Protestants.

In any case, I just received Tim Staples book on the Biblical and historical evidence for the Marian dogmas. So he’s going to clear all this up for me.

Thanks

 

[Della]

I know what you are saying, but from an outside perspective, it seems that “belief in Mary” is only relevant for two reasons. 1. She was the Mother of God and that relates something about Jesus’s divine nature. The IC does to some degree as well. Her having a sinless life doesn’t necessarily relate to Jesus. And the assumption really follows from all the others. 2. Believing in Mary is faith in the Church that it is correct about the Marian dogmas.

It is very difficult for Protestants to accept that “belief in” ANY human other than Jesus is ultimately relevant for salvation and the Christian life. The feeling they get is that if there was more than one sinless person, then the sinlessness of Jesus is diminished. I know the answers and response to that, I’m just relaying how it can seem to Protestants.

In any case, I just received Tim Staples book on the Biblical and historical evidence for the Marian dogmas. So he’s going to clear all this up for me.

Thanks

If I were discussing these issues with an uninformed Protestant I would word my posts for that person. I firmly believe in meeting people where they are, as long as they are willing to give the Church’s teachings a hearing. Some folks have such a knee-jerk reaction to the very name Mary that trying to tell them anything is nearly impossible. I have to wonder where that feeling comes from. It certainly isn’t from God.

We believe Mary’s sinlessness is important because God saw fit that she be sinless. It tells us that we too can be sinless in Christ–that holiness isn’t merely imputed, it’s imbued within the soul of the baptized. Those outside the Church may not be able to grasp that since their understanding of justification may be wrong.

I hope Tim Staples book will be helpful. Still, giving assent to all the Church teaches doesn’t mean fully understanding it. I certainly didn’t when I was received into the Church. Indeed, I didn’t even pray for such understanding, rather I prayed that God give me an open heart and mind to learn. I fully believe that because of that prayer I had insight after insight come to me, and along with that, peace of heart and mind. It’s not just about accepting teachings, it’s about having the humility to say we don’t know everything, we need to be taught, and we need to trust Christ’s Church because it is Christ’s Church.

 

[Wesrock]

I think Catholics and protestants handle the word belief and faith differently. There is intellectual assent, and then there is obedience and submitting yourself to an authority and following a teacher. Intellectual assent is not salvific, even in Jesus. Obedience and submission is. You’re not required to submit yourself to Mary, or devote yourself to her, or treat her as your sovereign lord/lady. It’s just intellectual assent to a fact. The only person we acknowledge that obedience and submission to is required, the only person we must follow for salvation is Jesus Christ and his mystical body, the Church (second half of that is more nuanced, but yes, salvation does flow through Christ’s body).

I’d like to provide my thoughts on the Marian dogmas and Christ in more detail, later.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I think Catholics and protestants handle the word belief and faith differently. There is intellectual assent, and then there is obedience and submitting yourself to an authority and following a teacher. Intellectual assent is not salvific, even in Jesus. Obedience and submission is. You’re not required to submit yourself to** Mary, or devote yourself to her**, or treat her as your sovereign lord/lady. It’s just intellectual assent to a fact. The only person we acknowledge that obedience and submission to is required, the only person we must follow for salvation is Jesus Christ and his mystical body, the Church (second half of that is more nuanced, but yes, salvation does flow through Christ’s body).

I’d like to provide my thoughts on the Marian dogmas and Christ in more detail, later.

Well, we do have Holy days of obligation honoring her that are built into the liturgical calendar. If you are a protestant and still uneasy about Mary, this might make you uncomfortable. I know it did for me as I walked out of one of those services when i began exploring Catholicism.

Having a clearer understanding of who she really is goes a long way in regards to intellectual assent. Staples does a good job of making that picture clearer.

 

[pablope]

I

It is very difficult for Protestants to accept that “belief in” ANY

 

[Memaw]

The Marian dogmas concerning her Immaculate Conception, her Perpetual Virginity, and her Assumption are important because they are true. However, except for the teaching that Mary was a virgin before Jesus was conceived in her womb, they concern matters that were only “fitting,” not matters that were absolutely necessary for the Incarnation and our Redemption. For instance, owing to the dignity of the Child she was to bear, it was fitting that the Virgin Mary be immaculately conceived but it was not absolutely necessary that she be so conceived. Owing to the dignity of the Child she was to bear and did bear, it was fitting that the she remained a perpetual virgin but it was not absolutely necessary that she remain a virgin. It was fitting that the Virgin Mary was rewarded for her faithfulness in life by being bodily assumed into heaven at the end of her life but it was not absolutely necessary that she be so rewarded.

It would be great if you believed the Marian dogmas but, personally, I think it would be fine for you to join the Catholic Church if you are at least neutral concerning the Marian dogmas, i.e., if you are willing to accept that they might be true. I think the only reason you should not join the Catholic Church is if you outright reject the Marian dogmas, i.e., if you are convinced that the Marian dogmas cannot possibly be true. In other words, if you are convinced that Mary was conceived with Original Sin like the rest of us and could not possible have been immaculately conceived even by a special favor from God, then you should not join the Church. If you are convinced that Mary gave birth to other children besides Jesus and could not possibly have remained a virgin during and after the birth of Jesus, even by a special favor from God, then you should not join the Church. If you are convinced that Mary’s body remains in its grave and could not possibly have been assumed into heaven at the end of her earthly life, even by a special favor from God, then you should not join the Church. Otherwise, I think you should go for it.

Evidently the Marian Dogmas were “necessary” or God wouldn’t have Willed it so!! Why does man seem to want to question everything God says and does through HIS Church?? That really puzzles me. Who knows best, Us or GOD?? God Bless, Memaw

 

[guanophore]

Right, that is one answer I was given. I’d just say that it is odd from the “outside” because even if one professes those things proven about Christ via Marian dogma, that wouldn’t be enough, one has to profess about Mary directly, in my understanding at least. Does that go against the “no other name” passage? I dunno. Still thinking it over. Thank you for your reply!

I am nor sure what you mean by 'one has to profess about Mary directly" but there are no such professions for those becoming Catholic. The Creed is used, and a general statement to believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. The only specific reference to Mary is the one in the creed, which is actually a statment about the incarnation.

 

[auctoris]

Why does man seem to want to question everything God says and does through HIS Church?? That really puzzles me. Who knows best, Us or GOD??

It’s been going on for a very long time. Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible and that is exactly what Job is doing.

 

[Della]

It’s been going on for a very long time. Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible and that is exactly what Job is doing.

If I may gently correct you, it’s what Job did, but he never questioned God’s right to tell men what they should know or how they should behave. God’s only answer was the same as it was for Moses and the prophets, “I AM.” We don’t question God’s words or his will, we don’t always understand, but we don’t question him in those ways.

 

[AveOTheotokos]

If I may gently correct you, it’s what Job did, but he never questioned God’s right to tell men what they should know or how they should behave. God’s only answer was the same as it was for Moses and the prophets, “I AM.” We don’t question God’s words or his will, we don’t always understand, but we don’t question him in those ways.

Amen!

Coincidentally, I just finished reading the book of Job after feeling called to do so this morning after reading an article about it, so it’s funny that Job came up in this thread that I am following/contributing to the past couple days.

I am not very well versed in Old Testament, so I would have been a little lost had I not just read it.

It is truly astounding how the Holy Spirit guides us if we are just willing to listen