Confusion

[NewPerspective]

I dont fully understand how catholics arrive at the premise that the Apocrypha and other books not mentioned in scripture are means by which doctrine should be based. Even after having talked to many catholics and doing some studying to understand why you believe what you believe I still cant arrive at the understanding of why you guys consider Mary “The Holy Intercessor” and dedicate more of the rosary to her than to our Father in Heaven. I am dumbfounded at such a concept. Mary was a faithful follower of Christ and a good example of how we should follow Him, but she is no “Holier” than us or our only means of intercession. I also dont understand the whole concept of Priesthood in the catholic church. Do you realize that God has made us joint heirs with Christ and His priesthood. There is not one priest or one man that stands in the gap as the pope does for you guys. I also havent came across anywhere in scripture where it advises us to allow a man to interpret scripture fully for us ultimately making it up to us rather we read it for ourselves or not. I believe there is no possibility of revelation or growth in the mere hearing what one man has to say. If someone could clear some of these things up it would be much appreciated.

P.S. Clearing these issues up doesnt mean siting excerpts from Catechism or the Apocrypha or whatever it is that is accepted as relevant teaching in the catholic faith. Someone explain it to me in a way that i can tell that they truly understand and believe what they are saying.

God Bless

 

[LilyM]

We’re all intercessors, right? You pray for me, I pray for you, we’re both interceding for each other. We believe that ALL the saints, Mary included, both those in heaven and on earth, can and do pray for us. We certainly don’t believe Mary is our only intercessor by any means - attend a Catholic Mass (our highest form of prayer, by the way) and it is 110% addressed to God the father, not through Mary or anyone else!

Mary IS special, and IS uniquely holy. She alone is BLESSED AMONG ALL WOMEN. Elizabeth becomes filled with the spirit upon HER greeting - ‘when your voice reached my ears’. Interesting - Elizabeth herself doesn’t attribute it to Jesus’ presence foremost, nor does she say ‘blessed is your child’ and only THEN ‘blessed are you among women’.

Elizabeth isn’t singled out like Mary, Peter and Paul aren’t ‘blessed among all men’ in the same fashion either, nor any of the other Apostles. Mary alone gets this accolade.

As for the length of the Hail Mary - I may spend half an hour telling you about my problems and asking you to pray for me. At the end of that half hour you may intercede for me by saying five words ‘Jesus, please help Lily. Amen.’ Hence the length of the prayer doesn’t relate to its importance in the slightest.

As an analogy - I myself talk much more to my own mother and sisters than my father - does that mean I love him less? Not a bit, it simply means that he’s not as talkative - and that I can rely on her and them to tell him everything anyway Does he resent the fact that I talk to her? Not at all - he loves her more than I possibly could and sometimes gives her messages to pass back to me too.

 

[Church_Militant]

I dont fully understand how catholics arrive at the premise that the Apocrypha and other books not mentioned in scripture are means by which doctrine should be based.

Why not. They were in the Bible long before the so-called reformers took them out.

Even after having talked to many catholics and doing some studying to understand why you believe what you believe I still cant arrive at the understanding of why you guys consider Mary “The Holy Intercessor” and dedicate more of the rosary to her than to our Father in Heaven.

As mother of the Messiah, Mary automatically falls into the role of the “Giberah” or Queen Mother. Because Jesus is the Messiah, which automatically makes him king of Israel, she fulfills the place of intercessor for needs. It takes nothing away from Christ any more than you praying for a friend would.

The Rosary is a devotion to Mary and at the same time a meditation on the life of Christ. There are other Rosaries (also knowns as Chaplets), that are to Christ as well as other saints.

I suggest that you look into the Divine Mercy Chaplet, and realize that Catholics believe very strongly in the communion and intercession of saints. (MP3 Bible study)

I am dumbfounded at such a concept. Mary was a faithful follower of Christ and a good example of how we should follow Him, but she is no “Holier” than us or our only means of intercession.

I might beg to differ. Are you as holy as you should be? Do you know of anywhere in the Word of God where the Blessed Virgin is noted as sinning? I would suggest that she had a deeper and more living relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ than any of us can possibly imagine.

As for your final comment. Can you provide me with any authentic Catholic teaching that says that Mary is “our only means of intercession”? I don’t think so since no such exists.

I also dont understand the whole concept of Priesthood in the catholic church. Do you realize that God has made us joint heirs with Christ and His priesthood. There is not one priest or one man that stands in the gap as the pope does for you guys.

This is total misrepresentation of the Pope’s position. As for the priesthood, there is no passage of scripture that says that there will be no priesthood. part of your problem is that you probably think that there are no sacraments in the Bible, and you are dead wrong there. (“I Find No Sacraments In The Bible.” he said.)

I also havent came across anywhere in scripture where it advises us to allow a man to interpret scripture fully for us ultimately making it up to us rather we read it for ourselves or not.

(You really do need to open separate threads on all these topics or else use the forum search feature to find ones already in existence. The Forum Rules discourage scattergun posts like you are doing here.)

If your interpretation, or your pastor’s, does not agree with the Bible and/or with the writings of the early church, the who do you suppose is likely to be in error. The verifiable historic writings of the early church give us insight into what the apostles handed on by way of teachings that insure that one does not stray from it.

I believe there is no possibility of revelation or growth in the mere hearing what one man has to say.

Far from being the learning of “what one man has to say”, the Catholic Church has more and better sources than any n-C church around.
(Cont’d)

 

[Church_Militant]

If someone could clear some of these things up it would be much appreciated.

That’s what I’m doing…

P.S. Clearing these issues up doesnt mean siting excerpts from Catechism or the Apocrypha or whatever it is that is accepted as relevant teaching in the catholic faith. Someone explain it to me in a way that i can tell that they truly understand and believe what they are saying.

If you took the time to actually read and study the Catechism of the Catholic Church (and especially all the notes) you’d find yourself about hip deep in more Bible passages and scholarship than you have ever imagined. I have and I know what I’m talking about.

As for your reference to “the apocrypha”, I can assure you that we do not use apocryphal works as part of our Bible. There are 7 books and parts of 3 others that are from the Septuagint and if you look at the earliest writings about the canon you’ll soon discover that even then they were considered inspired. These Deuterocanonical books were quoted by Christ and the apostles as well as the Jews of his day. (Do a forum search on this…there’s an active thread here somewhere about this. I just saw it the other day.)

Here’s my testimony for the record.
[SIGN]Welcome to CAF![/SIGN]